logoalt Hacker News

Insanityyesterday at 7:39 PM6 repliesview on HN

Don't think it matters in the long run to be honest. The models have no moat, they are becoming a commodity.

Besides that, Google is in a pretty good position, they're not bleeding money on AI like Anthropic/OpenAI, and they own product verticals where they can integrate it. Plus they have a mature ads-model which is what might actually drive a bit of revenue for LLMs.


Replies

fourseventyyesterday at 8:02 PM

I think the 'models have no moat' thing is overblown. Only like 3-4 companies in the entire world have cutting edge models, that means there is some kind of moat...

show 4 replies
dabbzyesterday at 8:52 PM

I feel like the models have no moat paradigm died when a single model expanded past the memory of single GPU slices. The moat is hosting the model. Even paying a server host to run a rack of GPUs has immense upstart cost, and then you're still struggling to compete on the add-ons of the things on top of the model (prompts, validation loops, etc). You can only throw so much money at a problem.

show 1 reply
root_axisyesterday at 7:41 PM

And they've had some initial success with TPUs which could be a major differentiator in the future.

show 1 reply
maxdoyesterday at 8:02 PM

yeah, sure, look at anthropic revenue, what is it if not the moat? you can argue for how long but for them good model = the fastest growing company ever.

show 1 reply
xnxyesterday at 7:49 PM

> models have no moat

Possibly true. Any smart innovations developed by one organization will be smuggled into others.

Training, inferring, and data collection, infrastructures are definitely moats. High-volume usage feedback is also hard to come by for new entrants.

show 1 reply
observationistyesterday at 7:47 PM

I don't think you're honestly accounting for the engineering behind the progress models are making. If it was just a matter of compute on hand and iterating, Meta would be neck and neck with Ant, OAI, and Google, but clearly you've gotta have more.

Noam has a deep expertise in these systems at every level, both algorithmically and at production scale, and knows how to leverage things at different levels.

It's not like Google won't have anyone else that can do what he does, but at the same time, it's an implicit criticism of Google's culture, operations, development, and overall AI program. Shazeer is well past the point where the paycheck is the deciding factor, although I'm certain he is very well paid. Having the freedom to innovate and build free from the corporate fuckery of Google and Facebook is probably more valuable than the pay raise he got with the move, and OAI has the advantage of not having to cope with decades of corporate cruft and inertia. They'll get there - all corporations do - but they're relatively young enough to still be nimble.

show 2 replies