No one serious cares if there's a bubble in the stock market because the financials are solid and when those play out then whatever "bubble" you imagine exists today will be small compared to realized revenues in a few years.
[–] metobehonest 3 days ago
[–] JacobAsmuth 3 days ago
[–] wolttam 2 days ago
- the utility of the models is not that great (see almost every company outside of tech and even many within tech reporting “no measurable increased revenue or productivity as a result of adopting the technology”.
- China has been undercutting them hard with open-weight models that are “good enough” for 95%+ of use-cases, leaving only the hardest problems for OpenAI and Anthropic’s models, which it turns out isn’t where there is a ton of money to made (curing various forms of cancer is valuable but not “let’s dump trillions on these companies” valuable - and once their models can solve it, it probably won’t be long before others do too).
People want these models on their own hardware. People will (eventually) want these models running on robots that can do real work for them, and they won’t want those things tethered to an insecure and privacy eviscerating cloud subscription.
The money to be made is in selling hardware, as it should be.
Anthropic’s S1 still shows them not even breaking even on revenue/expenses during what was probably their biggest year of adoption, right before people started going “oh, I can do this with an open model”
I’m not saying anything new here. What are we missing?
[–] JacobAsmuth 2 days ago
OpenAI seems to be in a much tougher spot and I'm not sure how they'll fare in the future.
But honestly, neither of those really matter to me and its why I didn't mention them in my above comment. Anthropic + OpenAI revenue is ~$120B/yr, and even if those companies go to zero because open models commoditize their business model, that demand for inference isn't going to go away, someone will need to absorb it. In fact I would expect that an open model good enough to drive demand for Opus 5.5 all the way down to zero would be so good that inference on that model would drastically exceed what we're seeing. I'm more concerned with one layer up, the datacenter builders and the semiconductor companies, and there I see fortress balance sheets, great governance, and massive demand. Open Models are great for these companies, not a threat at all. I don't see any credible threat to AWS+Azure+GCP datacenter buildout not paying for itself.
[–] metobehonest 3 days ago
[–] JacobAsmuth 2 days ago
2. Burry has repeatedly made claims about semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturers that even the most rabid anti-ai industry expert would tell him were false. He also has made dozens if not hundreds of predictions of impending doom that simply did not come true and in fact had to shutter his fund last year due to massive losses.
If the financials were "solid" it wouldn't be called a bubble. People are pointing to the bubble saying it's a bubble exactly because the financials are not solid and the expected revenue that would make the valuations and investments make sense is vaporware.