Remix.run Logo
bryanlarsen 3 hours ago

10% capture seems highly unlikely. That level of capture is only possible for b2b high touch sales, aka "call-me" pricing.

For call-me pricing to work, you have to ensure that any sort of public sticker price is not a suitable alternative. You can not have a sticker price, make the sticker price so high essentially nobody will buy it or by finding a feature like oauth that makes the public version infeasible for businesses.

And then you also have to maintain enough of a monopoly / oligarchy to sustain that level of pricing.

I don't think either of those two conditions will apply in the future.

AI providers now have a sticker price that provides basically all functionality, almost completely eliminating the opportunity for extremely high-margin b2b. They've decided a small slice of a large pie is bigger than large piece of a smaller pie. I suspect that's true and will continue to be true in the future.

An oligarchy is difficult to sustain with more than 3 global players. Right now we seem to have 3 frontier models for coding that can and will charge more than commodity prices. However there are open source non-frontier models that you can use for inference costs only and even if those don't keep up it seems likely there will be enough non-frontier models available that their pricing will also be at the commodity level. Those cheaper models will provide significant downward pressure on frontier pricing.

mg 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't think we have seen "all functionality" yet.

We have not seen iterative AI use for example.

The use case, where you tell the model "Solve this task. Then solve it again. Keep the better solution, then solve it again. On and on. Tomorrow, show me the best solution.".

And also not the "Run a company on your own" use case.

Those might make people and companies use models full-time. The price of that will be way different from current subscription prices. The TCO of a single instance of a SOTA model is on the order of $100k per year.

bryanlarsen an hour ago | parent [-]

I believe that you're arguing "1% GDP increase due to AI is too conservative" rather than against "capturing 10% of the value increase is possible".

bryanlarsen 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think more realistic napkin map is 10% GDP bump and 1% capture. You'll still find a lot of people who think we're going to get more than a 10% GDP bump from AI, but it'll definitely be fewer.

Will AI increase the rate of GDP growth by 0.5% or so over 20 years?