> xAI needs money to win the AI race

Off on a tangent here but I'd love for anyone to seriously explain how they believe the "AI race" is economically winnable in any meaningful way.

Like what is the believed inflection point that changes us from the current situation (where all of the state-of-the-art models are roughly equal if you squint, and the open models are only like one release cycle behind) to one where someone achieves a clear advantage that won't be reproduced by everyone else in the "race" virtually immediately.

Like any other mega-scaler, theyre just playing Money Chicken.

Everyone is spending crazy amounts of money in the hopes that the competition will tap out because they can't afford it anymore.

Then they can cool down on their spending and increase prices to a sustainable level because they have an effective monopoly.

I _think_ the idea is that the first one to hit self improving AGI will, in a short period of time, pull _so_ far ahead that competition will quickly die out, no longer having any chance to compete economically.

At the same time, it'd give the country controlling it so much economic, political and military power that it becomes impossible to challenge.

I find that all to be a bit of a stretch, but I think that's roughly what people talking about "the AI race" have in mind.

> Off on a tangent here but I'd love for anyone to seriously explain how they believe the "AI race" is economically winnable in any meaningful way.

Because the first company to have a full functioning AGI will most likely be the most valuable in the world. So it is worth all the effort to be the first.

They ultimately want to own everyone's business processes, is my guess. You can only jack up the subscription prices on coding models and chatbots by so much, as everyone has already noted... but if OpenAI runs your "smart" CRM and ERP flows, they can really tighten the screws.