It sounds plausible they spent more, given the output tokens (6 billion of them) would cost $300k at API prices and presumably there will have been many more input tokens than output tokens.

▲

_aavaa_ 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Unlikely, api pricing includes a healthy profit margin (as near as we can tell from the outside) which they wouldn’t charge themselves.

▲

mbesto an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> healthy profit margin (as near as we can tell from the outside)

Ugh we still don't know if this is true and it's nearly impossible to calculate without a full understanding of the real CAPEX cycle. Stop spreading these rumors until we know for sure.

	▲	bryanlarsen 35 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		SemiAnalysis estimates their profit margin to be 70%. To be losing money on inference implies that their costs are almost 4X higher than SemiAnalysis has calculated. That's not credible.

▲

alch- 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think Anthropic is turning a profit ;)

▲

_aavaa_ an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Whether on net they turn a profit as company overall is neither here nor there.. My point is that they are selling API tokens at a profit (or if being pedantic, then at a price higher than the cost to serve them ignoring research costs). And that that price is got a healthy margin which they don't charge themselves.

▲

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

Because of the ongoing training costs. They are certainly making a healthy profit margin on inference.

	▲	Philip-J-Fry 28 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Never really a sound argument. It's like having new solar panels installed every week. Sure you're "profitable" on the $0.20/kWh you're selling your "free" energy at when you ignore the cost of the solar panels you're buying every week.

▲

dist-epoch 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Neither did Amazon for it's first 25 years ;)

▲

caughtinthought an hour ago | parent [-]

I think you're missing the point of the comment you responded to, lol.

▲

CaptWorld an hour ago | parent [-]

Regardless the profit margin as a talking point seems to be bad as AI as a tech might never be reversed whether anthropic failed or succeeded. Indeed it's imperative we subsidize AI companies and tech to make them explore more solutions to scientific problems which has a downstream effect on human flourishing.

▲

oblio an hour ago | parent [-]

Or we could invest in a ton of other non AI related research we're underinvesting in.

	▲	CaptWorld 33 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Like? I feel breakthroughs that can be found via AI might help us more in the long term where even previously non AI fields can be helped by AI. So you have specific non AI research in mind that we're underinvesting in? Because the USA is already spending crazy anyway for healthcare and I don't feel like funding is the issue but better incentives, reforms etc