logoalt Hacker News

aurareturntoday at 8:12 AM7 repliesview on HN

He's right, there is a race. It's going to be a natural monopoly or duopoly because the cost to train the next SOTA model is always increasing. I can see that there are only 3 companies competing for the duopoly or monopoly realistically: OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. Everyone else has fallen behind. The flywheel of generate more revenue, get more data, get more compute train a better model might already be too great to overcome for anyone else.

I don't understand why he thinks OpenAI can't be one of the duopolies or become the monopoly. OpenAI's models are always the first or second best overall - usually the first. They are also leading in the consumer market by a wide margin. They also made a strategic decision that is paying off which was committing to more compute early on while Anthropic is hammered by the lack of compute.

PS. They've raised ~$200b total, not $1 trillion.


Replies

preommrtoday at 8:31 AM

> I can see that there are only 3 companies competing for the duopoly or monopoly realistically: OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google.

I could see people saying this in 2022, but now? No chance.

Chinese models keep demonstrating that SOTA can be approximated for a fraction of the cost. The innovation out of these companies keep showing diminishing returns, with a greater emphasis on the tooling and application layer. Having the right workflow with the right data is more important than having the right model. We could freeze AI now, and I'd bet good money that the current state of things is good enough to - not be first - but competitive for the next few years.

Even if we do end up with a oligopoly situaiton, it'll be less like Microsoft in the 90s and more like Microsoft now where they just give out windows for free, have support for WSL and the focus is on cloud services rather than their OS.

atwrktoday at 8:27 AM

How can this become a monopoly/duopoly? There is no moat, the Chinese providers will continue to hunt the market leader at 10% of the price, there is no network effect (OpenAI's Sora was a play in that direction and failed).

I'm constantly amazed how this AGI/monopoly narrative can be kept up so long in the West, it just doesn't make sense (unless the state creates said monopoly by forbidding competition).

show 1 reply
JumpCrisscrosstoday at 11:54 AM

> can see that there are only 3 companies competing for the duopoly or monopoly realistically: OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google

Amazon and Microsoft have a seat at the table by virtue of their cloud businesses.

dgellowtoday at 9:18 AM

I think the performance of models is only one aspect. You have to take in account the cash flow, how much spending commitment the different actors have, debt, etc. OpenAI has taken some very risky commitments, of they don’t get the revenue to cover their expenses in the next few years their situation will be pretty bad

orwintoday at 8:59 AM

Yeah, no, i disagree. Frontier models were almost untouchable 6 month ago, but now i can get 90% of Opus 4.5 with any chineese model, or even with Mistral. The only thing i'm missing is the chain of thought that help me understand the "how" and "why" when AI fails at its task. For the "general purpose" AI, it's even worse, any free model i can run on my Intel Arc (yes, sorry, it was discounted an very cheap) i get like 80% of a frontier model, at virtually no cost, and i suppose Deepseek/Mistral are like 95% there.

libertinetoday at 8:26 AM

Out of those 3, only Google seems to be in the position to reach that kind of profit levels due to distribution and advertising.

Claude is kicking ass in the niche of coding and processes.

1 trillion is a lot of money for something that's not differentiated and protected in a massive market.

Does it look like OpenAI has that in place?

Cuban thinks they don't, and won't.

show 1 reply