Remix.run Logo
Zigurd 2 hours ago

Everybody wants a platform but nobody wants to spend what it takes to make a platform. That includes things like Windows Phone, Fire Phone, all the glasses, Humane, etc.

As much as everybody hates on OpenAI for chaotic management, they did buy Jony Ive and are presumably giving him everything he wants to build a platform for them. Even though it probably only buys them a 20% chance of success, they haven't doomed the project by underestimating what it takes budget-wise.

And they blew it. Maybe they blew it by not realizing that even long time Apple employees could get arrogant about security. Or maybe it was a loose ethical environment in general. Whatever is it the root or the problem, they set billions of dollars on fire maybe tens of billions, by being unnecessarily cute about Apple proprietary information when they could've been above reproach. They had the resources to hire all the right people with the right knowledge and probably already had them on board.

ricardobayes an hour ago | parent | next [-]

AI model providers have zero "moat", clients change them as they see fit. This week ChatGPT, next week Claude. The real value is and going to be in hardware - as long as China doesn't enter the GPU/RAM race.

I increasingly see AI investment, generally speaking, as a lost cause. It has very little chance to pay off.

glaslong 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Yup. Model capabilities seem to keep converging quickly, not leaders breaking away for long.

Frontier labs are racing towards SaaS commoditization at incredible speed. And while there might possibly be $Trillions in productivity gained from their use, there's no reason to think those gains get captured by the model makers or inference providers at this point.

Maybe the Claude or ChatGPT desktop apps will dominate as the new MS Excel, but that's hard to do without already having locked the whole market into Windows.

There's virtually no platform play available to them.

nxobject 22 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> AI model providers have zero "moat", clients change them as they see fit.

That might be true in tech-savvy industries -- but in non-tech industries where the biggest software purchase might be the office suite or the ERP, inertia means the GSuite shops stick with Gemini, and the Exchange/Office 365 shops stick with Copilot.

bg24 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

There is a time window when it will flip. When Internet came along, we had a number of businesses that did not survive over the next years.

This time, it is different with AI. The rate of change is significant.

mathisfun123 15 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I think you don't understand moat - that's not a moat.

petterroea an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm just happy we get to reap the rewards "for free" (i.e open models are slowly becoming usable, and the winner of the arms race will definitely stand on the shoulders of their competitors that didn't make it)

joelthelion 34 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> The real value is and going to be in hardware

Unless someone comes up with a brilliant optimization strategy or new hardware that renders all that inefficient Nvidia crap overnight.

BowBun 21 minutes ago | parent [-]

I'm privy to dozens of people working on this problem every day and I imagine there's many more people working on this problem out of sight. I'm bullish on this idea, but it's going to be a slow burn.

amelius 4 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Everybody wants a platform but nobody wants to spend what it takes to make a platform.

That's why Apple used open-source software to build a kernel.

And why they used third party developers to develop the ecosystem of applications.

devin an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Forgive me, but what does Jony Ive know about building platforms?

grouchomarx an hour ago | parent | next [-]

being an exec at apple for decades you probably pick up on a few things, even if they're beyond your department

ironman1478 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The Luce seems to disprove that, at least in his case.

xp84 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It's the Apple Watch Edition of cars.

dramm 11 minutes ago | parent [-]

It’s the Apple Watch Edsel of cars.

blitzar an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I believe "Luce" is correctly pronounced "Apple Car"

shimman 5 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really, hubris is a real thing and not just a plot point.

joe_mamba an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

dofm 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't think Jony Ive has this skillset either. They might make a very nice device (I'd expect it to be polarising).

dzonga 10 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

the rot starts from the top.

sama plays loose with the truth. so likely the employees are gonna follow their boss in cutting corners.

you see it everywhere in gvt/large organizations - if you come from a poor country - if the president is corrupt - the whole gvt gets corrupted.

duped an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What does that have to do with employees stealing documents?

delusional 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Everybody wants a platform but nobody wants to spend what it takes to make a platform.

Ahistoric jibber jabber. Microsoft gave it their very best shot with Windows Phone. Facebook renamed the entire company to make VR happen. These companies have shoved everything they got into making these platforms, and their fate would not have been different if they had been given another billion.

Platforms are hard to make, and wanting it bad enough is not enough to make one.

Stealing from the one company that has managed to court success makes a lot of sense. They are the only company with any successful experience.

Zigurd 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Fair enough, but I'd point out that, unlike Second Life, Meta didn't buy pants. If you want a chronicle of wasted spending regarding Microsoft and mobile devices, Google "Tomi Ahonen."

StableAlkyne 16 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Meta didn't buy pants

They also succeeded in the monumental task of making VR look boring.

VR platforms are an escapist's dream: you can be anything you want doing whatever you want. And how did they show off their fantasy world machine? They did office meetings in avatars of their real life selves.

Just spend one night in VRChat and everything Meta did will look like Plato's cave shadows.

fauigerzigerk an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't know. Some of it did seem like short attention spans and not enough perseverence. But what do I know being far from an insider.

Apocryphon 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A decade ago Uber seemed poised to be the big tech powerhouse. Maybe not a platform per se (certainly not an ecosystem as other companies had it) but a major provider of software for all kinds of verticals beyond their core business. What happened to that?

nicce an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Uber managed to make the business by lobbying so hard. In some countries they broke the regulation of tax drivers and made the environment like wild jungle. Now, people don't feel "safe" anymore for random Taxis and prefer Uber in many places.

mprovost an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Most of Uber's "platform" seemed like pet projects that engineers used to justify promotions, and then were quietly abandoned.

therealdrag0 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Many of them left and turned into startups around that tech, like Temporal.

bellowsgulch 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, but how do we know specific manufacturing processes weren’t in employee contracts like, “If you leave Apple you can’t utilize the invisible weld process invented here for the iMac.”

I mean regardless of whether it’s a trade secret, you’re going to know how to do specific things that can’t be protected against copying.

There are no practical laws against understanding the laws of physics, chemistry, and metallurgy when it comes to anodizing.

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> There are no practical laws against understanding the laws of physics, chemistry, and metallurgy

Except there are. It’s why clean-room design [1] is a thing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean-room_design

aprilthird2021 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Your comment assumes they have stolen some propietary info or trade secrets but it hasn't been determined yet that they have, no?

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> it hasn't been determined yet that they have

Legally, no. Reasonably, for purposes of discussion, I think it has. The “LOL” dumbfuck who airlifted files into OpenAI isn’t particularly ambiguous [1].

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-11/openai-en...

aprilthird2021 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It is ambiguous still at this stage though. There's no proof he used this info at his job or that he was directed to take it by anyone (he may have thought it helpful to his career in a way OpenAI never asked for or even invited).

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> There's no proof he used this info at his job

LOL Liu hasn’t—to my knowledge—been fired. When OpenAI was notified of his conduct, they didn’t confidentially settle. Instead, OpenAI’s legal went cold on Apple.

It’s not legally certain. But you really have to stretch the facts to make this seem ambiguous.

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> And they blew it

This could be a blessing in disguise for OpenAI. This mess was conducted under Altman’s watch—it could be an opportunity to Kalanick him.

The Board could elevate Altman to Chairman emeritus or something, choose a new CEO and settle with Apple. That will probably involve shutting down the hardware project and clawing back comp from its employees who helped make this mess.

isodev 26 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Why are we taking Apple’s side here? They made accusations, nothing had been proven yet.

Who is to say Apple employees (at Apple) haven’t been vibe coding or asking gpt for technical topics? Also, funny timing from Apple - there is a lot of PR and optics riding on this lawsuit.