If Anthropic or OpenAI fails, the other wins the US market, no? I’m oversimplifying but…that’s a pretty realistic possibility in the face of people thinking sinking one US AI company would hurt the greater US venture into AI.

▲

cheema33 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> If Anthropic or OpenAI fails, the other wins the US market, no?

I am of the opinion that they both either succeed or they both fail. They are both losing money hand over fist and their model quality is pretty close to each other. There is not a whole lot that sets them apart.

	▲	nkmnz 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I agree on the analysis, but not on the conclusion. What makes you think that the conditions you describe are stable grounds for a duopoly where both could be successful at the same time?
	▲	tannertech 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If one fails the bubble pops so you're right.

▲

vrganj 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What if both fail?

▲

tourmalinetaco 3 hours ago | parent [-]

If they did then Google would take over, and others would form from their competent engineers. Also, they don’t need to be profitable to succeed, they merely need to hype investors enough to ensure that their losses matter less than their growth projections.

▲

vrganj 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What if all of them fail because the capitalist model of centralization followed by rent-seeking gets foiled by an open alternative?

That is explicitly the Chinese strategy.

Now, what if the largest capitalist economy went all-in on an AI that might no longer be sufficiently monetizable?

▲

porridgeraisin 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> explicitly the Chinese strategy

Oh come on, this post sounds like one of those twitter bots. No one seriously expected them to just give away billions in R&D for free, and they arent. The chinese model companies are actively moving away from the open source setup. Even state export controls.

	▲	vrganj 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Let me quote the big guy himself: > First, we should adhere to the principle of openness and win-win and boost innovation-driven development. As a new engine of world economic growth and an accelerator for the shift of growth drivers, AI is moving from the digital world into the physical world. We should seize this rare, historic opportunity to encourage open source, openness, collaboration and sharing. We should facilitate technological innovation, industrial development and scenario-based application of AI. We should make coordinated advances in the transformation and upgrade of traditional industries, the cultivation and growth of emerging industries and forward-looking planning for future industries, so that all sectors and businesses can benefit from AI -- Keynote speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping at opening ceremony of 2026 World AI Conference http://english.scio.gov.cn/topnews/2026-07/18/content_118605... As a socialist myself, the above comment looks like a prime example of what Mark Fisher would call capitalist realism, the ideological belief that there is no alternative. The fact that somebody would think past quarterly earnings appears unthinkable to the committed ideologue. They wouldn't give away R&D for free, they would give it away to destroy the capitalist mode of production, as outlined above. If that isn't a worthy goal from China's perspective, then I don't know what would be. China isn't the US. They don't share the same ideology, strategy or conclusions. As for the export controls, they explicitly exempt already-open models and set up an automated streamlined process for future ones.

▲

Hamuko 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

No? Why would either of one of those have to win? Even if you limit yourself to US companies only, Google and Meta still exist.