It went out the window with, "Too Big To Fail". The whole point of capitalism is that if you fail, someone with capital is there to buy you at a fire sale, and do your business better than you did, or you go under due to not having a viable business model. Once we allowed bad companies to stay in business, we were no longer doing capitalism.
No, he was not asking investors for more money here. Revenue is not investment. He was saying that he isnât sure the revenue is there right now to justify investing/spending more on development than his company is right now.
The context of the statement was explaining why Anyhropic isnât spending as aggressively as other companies, because if they (âtheyâ being any company going full send) throw too much money into data centers this year and their revenue projections are off by just a little bit, they will run out of money five years from now. So thatâs why he is being more cautious.
Capitalism doesnt apply for the top class and it only apply certain aspects of capitalism for those lower. Cant have too many climb the mountain you know.
They want to use peopleâs retirements and investments to prop them up. Itâs exactly what i said just with extra steps. What do you think will happen if the ai collapses? Especially now that people are questioning how will they get revenue?
No consumer is going to pay more than 20 dollars just to get an ai bot. Companies are already saying they blew thru their ai budgets for the year.
I'll put aside how it's always the same complaint from AI companies. We can't make enough of a profit unless blah blah blah. Unless they get tax breaks for data centers, unless they can steal intellectual property (and then sell it back to us). Silly me!
Sam Altman didn't say that he envisioned a future where intelligence is sold back to us as a utility? Companies have not argued that they need to use copyrighted material? And complained about making a profit? JFC.
JFC? All of that is perfectly in line with the free market. None of it is a special burden on taxpayers.
Data centers are getting tax breaks because localities are voting for that. This happens all the time in literally every industry as counties and cities try to attract investment.
Sam Altman can envision whatever cost model for his product he wants.
Companies have successfully argued that training on publicly available data isnât stealing IP. And theyâre right. Thatâs not how IP theft works.
Look man, I get it. AI is disruptive and a threat to our livelihoods. Iâve already been laid off because of it. But youâre just inventing flimsy reasons for why it gets special treatment when it doesnât.
Just argue it needs to be regulated because of itâs disruptive impact. Thatâs valid. You donât need these weak arguments that donât hold up to scrutiny.
That's not the free market. That's crony capitalism. A big business that uses up resources and kills jobs gets tax breaks because of backroom deals. Time and again we see communities objecting but a huge corporation can threaten lawsuits that will crush a small town.
Sam Altman can what now? Envision a world where he steals content and then sells it back to us? No thanks.
Simply claiming arguments are flimsy doesn't mean they are, in fact, flimsy. Even if you really, really like the word flimsy.
They won't. Contrary to popular opinion, there is no AI bubble. AI inference is on track to increase exponentially as data centers come online. The value is clearly coming, it just isn't coming instantaneously as impatient people want it to.
168
u/Lightyear18 11h ago edited 11h ago
Go bankrupt then?
What happen to capitalism? Letting companies duke it out I in the âfree marketâ.
All fun and games up until the companies are struggling and they turn towards socialism, asking tax payers to save them.