zlacker

>>tedsan+(OP)
It appears this basically locks out Google, Amazon and Meta. Why are we declaring OpenAI as the winner? This is like declaring Netscape the winner before the dust settled. Having the govt involved in this manner can’t be a good thing.

>>lvl155+g2
I generally agree that government sponsorship of this could be bad for competition. But Google in particular doesn't necessarily need outside investment to compete with this. They're vertically integrated in AI datacenters and they don't have to pay Nvidia.

>>modele+r7
Google definitely needs outside investment to spend $500b on capex.

>>shuckl+S9
They don't have to spend $500B to compete. Their costs should be much lower.

That said, I don't think they have the courage to invest even the lower amount that it would take to compete with this. But it's not clear if it's truly necessary either, as DeepSeek is proving that you don't need a billion to get to the frontier. For all we know we might all be running AGI locally on our gaming PCs in a few years' time. I'm glad I'm not the one writing the checks here.

>>modele+6b
This seems to be getting lost in the noise in the stampede for infrastructure funding

Deepseek v3 at $5.5M on compute and now r1 a few weeks later hitting o1 benchmark scores with a fraction of the engineers etc. involved ... and open source

We know model prep/training compute has potentially peaked for now ... with some smaller models starting to perform very well as inference improves by the week

Unless some new RL concept is going to require vastly more compute for a run at AGI soon ... it's possible the capacity being built based on an extrapolation of 2024 numbers will exceed the 2025 actuals

Also, can see many enterprises wanting to run on-prem -- at least initially