| ▲ | afavour 4 hours ago |
| Feels like being asked to invest in IBM just as other manufacturers started releasing the first PC compatible machines. Immediate term Anthropic, OpenAI rule the roost. But this is a very new technology and open models are already looking good. They’ll only get better. Is it realistic to think Anthropic will stay ahead of them enough to justify the valuation they’re asking for? |
|
| ▲ | sigmar 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| People have been saying the openweight models would collapse anthropic's revenue since the deepseek moment in January of 2025. They've stayed ahead in model intelligence and increased revenue by a lot since then. Not saying it couldn't happen in the future, but we've got to be circumspect about that narrative after almost 2 years of it, no? |
| |
| ▲ | riknos314 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How much of that revenue is usage from hosting partners (AMZN, M$, etc) who have a vested interest in using Anthropic instead of open weights though? | | |
| ▲ | JacobAsmuth 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well then the fact that those hosting partners have 10+ year commitments should make you pretty confident then, right? |
| |
| ▲ | afavour an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | January 2025 isn’t even two years ago yet. When you’re talking about giant companies going public you want to be looking at significantly longer timescales than that. | |
| ▲ | ex-aws-dude 22 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why would you be circumspect if the gap kept getting closer? Doesn't that indicate its becoming _more_ true? | | |
| ▲ | sigmar 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | What is the evidence the gap is closing? Seems like it has been the same "6 months behind" since Jan 2025. The first fable was trained in march and we still don't have an openweight model as capable |
|
|
|
| ▲ | seydor 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| End goal for both companies is probably to be absorbed by infrastructure companies |
