So, people are falling for Anthropic’s marketing scheme?
Personally, I find myself using the Chinese alternatives more and more as they are just way cheaper.
The good thing is that a deepseek can be run locally relatively well with consumer hardware. I trust chinese companies as much as i trust american companies with my data and my prompts.
You have 170+ GB VRAM at home? (:
I mainly use DeepSeek v4 Flash now, it’s the cheapest around and the quality is high enough for coding. At work we’re throwing tons of money at Claude, but even there I usually stick to Sonnet (as Opus is burning money).
You don’t need 170+ GB of VRAM. Whole model can be run at around 1 token/second on a modern hardware from an ssd. Which is slow, don’t get me wrong, but it still somewhat useable.
Upd.Once again, for those who use AI because struggles to read: it is slow, but it is usable. Which is, by definition, means that you don’t need 170+ GB of VRAM to run this model. Period. It runs from ssd. That is a fact.
“Somewhat” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there 😂 How much time does it take to process your average request?
It’s a weird business where everyone is offering an environmentally unsupportable service at below cost, hoping to outlive the competition.
Market share of a negative profit market.
It worked for netflix and the steaming services. Now terrestrial (cable) is dead and adsupported streaming tiers have returned lol.
It’s how every tech company that “disrupts” a market or indistry works. Uber started of burning shit tons of cash operating at a loss till it replaced enough Taxi services then jacked up the prices.
The problem with AI is that they cannot increase the prices enough to be profitable. The AI companies are waiting for future hardware tech that will be energy efficient enough to make AI profitable before they run out of capital to burn.
The problem with AI is that they cannot increase the prices enough to be profitable.
I saw something about the SpaceX IPO that said for it to be justified at that price, everyone on earth with some sort of money (they defined it as earning at least $14,000/year) had to become an xAI consumer and spend $28,000/year. Seems reasonable /s
I was thinking about that, but it did make governments move to digital programming (eg BBC, NPO), which they likely wouldn’t have done if it wasn’t for Netflix. I think it also improved the internet speeds here in NL significantly.
That’s not correct - the BBC announced iPlayer in 2003, tested 2004 onwards and finally launched in 2007 after being delayed by lobbying. The iPlayer was held back from full launch due to concerns from commercial competitors - in particular broadband providers lobbied against the iPlayer service because they feared the “pressure” it would put on the broadband infrastructure.
Netflix launched their streaming service in 2007.
Netflix did not originate the idea of streaming (nor did the BBC to be clear), much like Apple didn’t originate the smart phone. Netfiix did however do it better than it’s competitors, particularly the incumbents in the commercial sector.
I remember iPlayer in 2007: it was a mess, using DRM and P2P, requiring a full download before watching it. I wouldn’t call that a streaming service at all. Shows had to be watched within a week of broadcasting.
I welcome feedback but starting a comment with ‘thats not correct’ and then blatantly being incorrect is just some ol’ bullshit.
I never mentioned that either of the companies originated the idea of streaming. I only posited that Netflix pushed governments (in this case the Dutch and UK) to move to digital programming.
They did a better job by offering an unsustainable variety of programming from all the studios in one place at the same time. All of the competitors at the time only offered financially viable services.
I believe in ai now because I looked at the Netflix balance sheet and thought. “There is NO WAY they could become profitable they are spending wayyy to much money and have way to much debt. It’s financially impossible to get out of this hole”
I understand how it worked and how it could not have. There are a lot of ways this could fail on AI but there are some real ways forward. AI has a similar application reach as the internet. It’s world changing.
I see why meta and google are going in hard. They lived though the rise and fall of blockbuster. They saw Sony release 3 different steaming services before after and during Netflix. This is the disruption for the current generation of tech and their revenue model.
Someone is going to ‘Win’ AI and a lot of others will loose.
One company may win, but we all will lose for sure. Specially investors, the math doesn’t add up even if revenue breaks even.
It will be even more funny if these companies are declared financially bankrupt and the profitable parts are sold separately and the non profitable will stay with share holders.
I have never seen that happen. I have only seen companies get bailed out. It’s been decades since a giant insolvent company was split apart and sold for pennies on the dollar. They just enough money to buy financially solvent competition
I don’t mean giant companies exclusively, I mean all of them. If the owners have a decent accountant and lawyer, the company will bankrupt and the owners will end up richer.
And I don’t mean selling the company on pennies, I mean hollowing the company then letting it turn into dust.
Mistral or Lumo way to go
I don’t know what models power Lumo, but Mistral is so far behind the competition it’s not even funny.
Mistral Medium 3.5 isn’t that far behind comparable current open weight models.
Maybe, but Mistral is a commercial company that offers commercial products that can’t really compete with OpenAI, Anthropic, and the others. That’s what I meant.
I’m curious as to why you say that? I use Le Chat and to me it feels exactly like ChatGPT or Claude, it can code well, translate, search online, everything.
Subjectively, it feels similar to models we used a year or two ago. Not that drastically different from what Anthropic and OpenAI offer today, but slightly worse. For instance, for complex coding tasks it offers basic solutions, while Claude often offers more options and details - as if it knows more.
Objectively, benchmarks. Mistral looks comparable to other open weight models (as another user mentioned), but not as good otherwise.
I see, that’s about the time they all got so good that I stopped trying to keep up with the latest benchmarks. It works perfectly for my needs so I definitely wouldn’t dismiss it for anyone wanting to switch to a European alternative.
Sure, totally depends on your needs. But it’d be great if we had one of them frontier models in Europe.
Who the fuck cares
That depends; it will most likely cause some pretty serious issues outside the AI space. When that bubble finally pops, it’ll probably make the dot-com bust look like a bathtub fart. Knock-on effects over non AI industries, and a lot of little bitch CEO’s that put all their money/companies money in AI will now be out a whole lot of cash and go on (more) firing sprees.
And if it doesn’t pop, it has made ordinary people into millionaires. I was having a look at Swedish Avanza site where they launched a new feature where people can share their portfolios (what stocks they are invested in, and their account growth). The best investors got in early on all this stuff. Nvidia and now memory and disk stocks, so they consistently made tons and tons of money.
All while people has been waiting for the bubble to pop since… 2021? Maybe earlier.
We absolutely don’t know if it will pop, and even if it does, there was a huge opportunity to make money from it over years and years.
Thats what investment bankers did, and that’s what ordinary people did. Some got very rich on this.
Im just saying that because it’s important to realize that the way we think may not be optimal for our lives sometimes. I understand fear. But I also understand that some risks are necessary to gain something valuable.
Chat GPT came out in 2023. To the extent there was a bubble in 2021 (crypto and EV come to mind) those frothy parts of the market have deflated.
Thought it was worth adding to your comment that getting rich by taking extraordinary risk may not be “optimal”, and that looking at upside outliers is a bad way to decide what to do with personal finances.
If what you’re advocating is buying well diversified, low fee, investments with a long time horizon then carry right on though.
You can adjust your risk, sure. Those low fee diversified investments will give you index level gains, sure. But I meant getting actual rich. Then you need to bet on the right stocks.
Pfff
Best way to have a million is starting with 2 million.
Or write a book about how to get rich. Like that kyosaki guy that blew it up on real estate.
I’ve noticed that some people just have some built in resistence to learning about stocks. It keeps them poor and it’s almost as they want that. At the same time, some kids learn about stocks in their teens and start getting experience and then they invest through their entire life, seeing their money grow.
Its interesting see that attitude. Someone put it there. I would highly recommend challenging your views on this.
Say you get 300% gains on your money and consistently put 50% of your money in stocks for 50 years. It still won’t make most people rich.
Retiring comfortably? Sure, you’ve saved 50% of your salary. But rich? Like, Elon Musk family money in the 90s when no one knew him? Nope.
I care, thanks for asking.
not a gambling man but if i was… https://polymarket.com/event/sam-altman-in-jail-by
This is my first time actually navigating to one of these websites. God damn it’s so much more dystopian than I even imagined.
Hehe my experience was distopian alright, the page won’t load
