This assumes all the open models are just a result of distilling Anthropic models. Which remains to be proven.

And if they are, the point remains that Anthropic has a brittle product advantage that users and investors should be cautious about.

▲

asadotzler 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

OpenAI says they're not just distillation. "Some observations on Kimi: 1. It's a very good model! I don't think its performance can be explained away by distillation or anything like that."

If you put any faith in claims made by OpenAI's "Head of Strategic Futures," then it's hard to believe these models are just the result of distillation.

▲

simianwords 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> investors should be cautious about

if they are cautious, what would make them invest in newer bigger models without the expected return? generosity?

▲

drakythe 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Sunk cost fallacy.

So much money has been invested in Anthropic and OpenAI at this point that to declare it a loss and walk away could potentially destroy a lot of VC firms, and a non-trivial chunk of the US Economy.

▲

simianwords 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Sunk cost fallacy is not relevant to future investment.

▲

SideburnsOfDoom 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Sunk cost fallacy is not relevant to future investment

Outside of future choices, what in the world is sunk cost fallacy in fact relevant to? Do you understand words?

▲

daadx 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

what an absolute plonker

do you know how ROIC is calculated?

Good luck hiding your huge sunk cost of bilions and billions in there bro. I wish people who had zero understanding of actual finance would never comment about it.

Moreover if they declare their existing assets are bunk, the valuation is marked down, especially after now pricing in failure risk - this is catastrophic for VC's.

Again, bro, just be quiet.

	▲	simianwords 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		sanest comment here