Isn't the majority of AI compute training and not inference? Saying "It doesn't matter if the AI companies fold because I can run models on my computer" is like saying "I don't care if the farm closes because I get my food from the grocery store"

It's more like saying 'I don't care if monsanto goes under because I will save my own seeds to plant next year's crops'.

You are correct, but I think it's much more like consumer culture doesn't and never will care about any of these details.

Specifically with regard to AI, the consumers aren't even aware of the "grocery store" either. They're being served from a silver platter. What matters most is the quality of results, not the methods. You can disagree all you want for whatever (good and compelling) reasons, but it doesn't change the fact that many people do not even buy groceries now and doordash everything.

If it turns out that you can put a mobile kitchen in their backyard that cooks up everything without them realizing, it makes no difference to the consumer.

Realistically, yes there's a finite amount of training data, hence the plateau in capability we've seen for at least a year. I think we're likely to see a consolidation and compression of all of this into local models. The economics don't support the expected growth of the current arrangement either. There simply isn't that much distinct data out there as initially assumed.