| ▲ | sdesol a day ago |
| > Microsoft adding Deepseek support I believe this hasn't been confirmed yet but I think it speaks to a bigger problem for the AI companies which is, if you give capable developers a good reasoning LLM, they can make it work like it was a really expensive model. I believe we are 100% at the stage of good enough for the vast majority of tech companines. Fable and others will be more valuable for non-traditional tech companies. I read somewhere that the chinese AI companies are sharing knowledge and it would not surprise me if the government is applying pressure by saying work together or else. If they work together, they can truly commoditize LLMs and with China ramping up hardware support for AI, I see the future being inference speed and hardware being the moat. |
|
| ▲ | thewebguyd a day ago | parent [-] |
| If hardware becomes the moat, the US frontier labs are screwed. We have AWS, Azure, GCP. All three have or are making inference silicon. LLMs become just another service in the public cloud's large service catalog, and open weight wins. Which makes sense to me. Selling a chatbot interface/model access to the general public was never going to be a viable long term play. You still need developers to wrap the models into specialized tools. Queue the Jobs quote "It's a feature, not a product." |
| |
| ▲ | KolibriFly a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The funniest thing would be if in a couple years LLMs just end up being another checkbox next to PostgreSQL and Kubernetes | | |
| ▲ | thewebguyd a day ago | parent [-] | | I don't think that's far fetched at all either and is probably the end game ultimately. No one wants to buy a chatbot, they want to automate something with it. Intelligence is just another PaaS offering right next to storage, compute. The only hiccup in that happening is will the US Gov let Anthropic and/or OpenAI fail when that time comes. |
| |
| ▲ | sdesol a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The big thing is, the western world has moved so much of the manufacturing to China and think a lot of people will not forgive Samsung and others, so I can see China owning a good portion of the supply chain. | | |
| ▲ | johnvanommen a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > The big thing is, the western world has moved so much of the manufacturing to China I built my career on Solaris and it got rugpulled by Linux. That wasn’t because of software, it was because of hardware. Linux’s cost advantage existed because Sun hardware had huge margins, because their software was basically free. AI will probably be a repeat of this. Whoever can come up with the hardware solution that minimizes the cost per token will win. I believe the 5090 still holds this crown, but someone certainly knows better than I do. | | |
| ▲ | rescbr a day ago | parent | next [-] | | While people fly to the US to buy Macs at a lower price and bring them back in their backpacks, I guess I'll be flying to HK to buy a Chinese GPU rather sooner than later... | |
| ▲ | trollbridge a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Fortunately, Solaris skills map to Linux pretty cleanly. | |
| ▲ | fragmede a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | but not all tokens are equal and vertical integration is the name of the game. Solaris did not lose to Linux, it lost to the LAMP stack on commodity x86 hardware. without the "AMP" part, Linux would've been dead in the water. | | |
| ▲ | fluoridation a day ago | parent [-] | | The L part of LAMP is kinda irrelevant at the application level, though. From the point of view of running the software, SAMP or LAMP doesn't make any difference. So yes, Solaris lost the competition with Linux to be the first letter of the acronym. |
|
| |
| ▲ | bluGill a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | While China makes a lot and a lot was moved, don't let that fool you. The western world is still making a lot of things. Manufacturing is bigger than ever in the US by any useful measure of manufacturing except the measure of number of people working in that field. Very few people work in a factory anymore because automation has replaced most of them. A factory that had 2000 employees in 1950 should have under 200 today to make the same things. If it can be that automated it moved to China. |
|
|