| ▲ | qaq 12 hours ago |
| If people were not consuming their services they would not be buying inference hardware at this rate so it's pretty much on consumers. |
|
| ▲ | Insanity 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| They are reserving future HW productions to meet their hypothetical usage as well. Which is why others (like Apple) can’t reserve it for their future products. Yet the AI labs are speculating on usage, and spending money from investments without clear revenue path. |
| |
| ▲ | qaq 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes 65B ARR that Anthropic has is clear indication there is no path to revenue. | | |
| ▲ | Insanity 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Sorry, I should have said "profit path", good catch!
They have revenue, but their cost scales with revenue and they're losing more than they are making. See: https://www.wheresyoured.at/brokenomics/ for an interesting write-up on the economics of AI. | | |
| ▲ | brookst 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Their costs do not scale linearly with revenue. Inference is expensive, but it's a variable cost. Anthropic's overall costs include massive fixed costs in training, which are the same regardless of usage. It's easy to falsify the claim with a simple experiment: imagine they had no customer at all, $0 in revenue. Their costs would still be massive. If the claim were true, $0 revenue should mean $0 costs, right? | |
| ▲ | qaq 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If people are sure they can always short NVIDIA |
| |
| ▲ | mrbungie 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | How much money does that revenue cost though? If I had to steel-man GPs argument I'd ask for profits rather than revenues. | | |
| ▲ | qaq 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | We will see once they go public Dario did claim profit margin on inference is 40% if memory serves me right | | |
| ▲ | mrbungie 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That's convenient accounting. The reality is that they can't stop training since they risk losing customers if they do so. So they shouldn't factor it out of profitability analysis. | | |
| ▲ | qaq 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | A lot of factors there we will see how it plays out. |
| |
| ▲ | overgard 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes Dario is well known for his honesty | | |
| ▲ | qaq 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | hence the bit about us learning the actual state of things once they are a public company. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | danabrams 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is not sustainable forever unless their hypothetical usage is realized, and eventually the bill will come due. Meanwhile, component makers will surely be spinning up more capacity, some of them in a foolhardy manner, and if the bubble does burst, 3-6 months later we'll be seeing fire sales on components and component makers going bankrupt (or getting bailouts, if considered of national importance) | | |
| ▲ | butlike 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | I feel like the fact Apple raised their prices means they foresee this lasting a lot longer than 3-6 months. | | |
| ▲ | ErneX 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is going to be the 1st increase of a series of increases. I don’t think this will ease in the next 2-3 years. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | coldtea 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| People will consume a lot of things offered below actual cost thanks to VC and cheap loans. Doesn't mean people would legitimately use them enough to warrant such infrastracture demand, if they were priced according to actual costs. So it's a distorted market. |
| |
| ▲ | qaq 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Most of Anthropic revenue looks to be companies paying for Claude Code at API prices ... | | |
| ▲ | coldtea 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Companies will consume a lot of things offered below actual cost thanks to VC and cheap loans. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | rpgbr 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Ask every Windows 11 or Google consumer that doesn't give a damn for AI and, yet, has been almost forced to use Copilot and Gemini… |
|
| ▲ | crypttales 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [dead] |
