I think he's trying to help people understand that "He was responsible for hanging consumers out to dry" is some sort of wishful thinking.

Demand has far exceeded supply, and so consumers are priced out.

This is no different than how most developing countries have been priced out of top GPUs since the dawn of computing.

It sucks, but to pin the blame on someone for not selling you a GPU at below market rates is... not fruitful.

▲

soraminazuki a day ago | parent [-]

A handful of monopolies or oligopolies dealing with each other and cutting the rest of the world out is a classic example of market failure. It's not supply and demand determining the right price, because that requires a fair and competitive market, something that market fundamentalists always overlook.

▲

clivedup a day ago | parent [-]

The fabs are maxed out.

LLM providers document making 38 USD/hour/card. https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepInfer/blob/main/doc%2Finf...

Where is the conspiracy?

	▲	soraminazuki 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Whether the fabs may be maxed out or not doesn't mean anything outside of the handful of companies that secured a multi-year contract with the chip makers. How much some company charges for rented GPU capacity just shows us that GPU prices are exorbitantly high, not that the market is competitive nor fair. Acknowledging widely publicized multi-year contracts between the chip makers, hyperscalers, and AI labs isn't a "conspiracy." I don't get this. What's up with all the overzealous AI proponents using aggressive deny, deflect, discredit tactics against any criticism of the world's most powerful companies acting against the public interest? What's in it for them?