I think it also shows that fabs who only have one customer (ie, Intel) aren't as competitive because they can't provide as much scale and are more sensitive to that customer's success.
Intel's fab would be doing much better if it spun it out a while ago and was making Intel, Nvidia, and Apple chips right now.
I think another generalization people make here is around complexity. Many developers work on apps that just aren't that complex. Glorified CMS's mostly doing CRUD with well established code patterns.
Sure, LLMs might create slop on novel problems, but a non-tech company that needs to "create a new CRUD route" and an accompanying form, LLMs are smart enough.
Totally insane, $6.5B acquihire. But also, all stock deal and OpenAI appears to have an unlimited number of investors waiting to give them money if/when needed.
My understanding is that modern search engines are using embeddings / vector search under the hood.
So even if LLM's aren't directly passing a vector to the search engine, my assumption is that the search engine is converting to a vector and searching.
Just wonder if it matters? If Google spent 10x as much in the first 5 years of its life would it be a worse company now? Giant TAM, winner takes all (or most?), all that matters is winning.
>For what? There is no ROI at that price point. There is no monetisation potential.
I think your whole argument is based on this being true, but you didn't give much argument about why there is no ROI. 400M USD isn't hard to generate...even a moderate ad engagement lift on X would generate ROI and that's just 1 customer.
Imagine going back in time and showing every VC how great the search business will be in 20-30 years. The only rational response would be to make giant bets on 20 different Googles...and I think that's what's happening. These all seem like rational investments to me.
Because it’s fun to create things like this in very little time. Some people wake up and play wordle in the morning, I like to spend 15 minutes making something fun and dumb with v0 or lovable.
There are advertisers who specifically want to reach fans (gamers, tv/movie fans, etc), the name change was to make that ad sale conversation stronger: https://about.fandom.com/mediakit
It's usually due to incentives and the time horizon you're optimizing for. If a manager is tasked with maximizing revenue over the next 12 months no matter what, then increasing the ad load is a lever you are probably going to pull.
If your goal is to create an enduring product that will slowly grow revenue and be around forever, then you're probably not backed by VCs or private equity, or you have a cash machine (google search, etc).
The reality is that some businesses shouldn't take VC money and shouldn't get so big. Maybe a wiki farm should just be a wiki farm profitably run by 5 friends or something.
It’s a good point, but one thing to consider is that ultra long hard tech might be structurally challenging as well. If fusion requires 100 years of capital and R&D it won’t be viable ever due to economic/societal/structural reasons.
https://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2009/news20090309