Most active commenters
  • wkat4242(7)
  • jefftk(4)

←back to thread

Google is winning on every AI front

(www.thealgorithmicbridge.com)
993 points vinhnx | 23 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
codelord ◴[] No.43661966[source]
As an Ex-OpenAI employee I agree with this. Most of the top ML talent at OpenAI already have left to either do their own thing or join other startups. A few are still there but I doubt if they'll be around in a year. The main successful product from OpenAI is the ChatGPT app, but there's a limit on how much you can charge people for subscription fees. I think soon people expect this service to be provided for free and ads would become the main option to make money out of chatbots. The whole time that I was at OpenAI until now GOOG has been the only individual stock that I've been holding. Despite the threat to their search business I think they'll bounce back because they have a lot of cards to play. OpenAI is an annoyance for Google, because they are willing to burn money to get users. Google can't as easily burn money, since they already have billions of users, but also they are a public company and have to answer to investors. But I doubt if OpenAI investors would sign up to give more money to be burned in a year. Google just needs to ease off on the red tape and make their innovations available to users as fast as they can. (And don't let me get started with Sam Altman.)
replies(23): >>43661983 #>>43662449 #>>43662490 #>>43662564 #>>43662766 #>>43662930 #>>43662996 #>>43663473 #>>43663586 #>>43663639 #>>43663820 #>>43663824 #>>43664107 #>>43664364 #>>43664519 #>>43664803 #>>43665217 #>>43665577 #>>43667759 #>>43667990 #>>43668759 #>>43669034 #>>43670290 #
netcan ◴[] No.43662766[source]
> there's a limit on how much you can charge people for subscription fees. I think soon people expect this service to be provided for free and ads would become the main option to make money out of chatbots.

So... I don't think this is certain. A surprising number of people pay for the ChatGPT app and/or competitors. It's be a >$10bn business already. Could maybe be a >$100bn business long term.

Meanwhile... making money from online ads isn't trivial. When the advertising model works well (eg search/adwords), it is a money faucet. But... it can be very hard to get that money faucet going. No guarantees that Google discover a meaningful business model here... and the innovators' dilema is strong.

Also, Google don't have a great history of getting new businesses up and running regardless of tech chops and timing. Google were pioneers to cloud computing... but amazon and MSFT built better businesses.

At this point, everyone is assuming AI will resolve to a "winner-take-most" game that is all about network effect, scale, barriers to entry and such. Maybe it isn't. Or... maybe LLMs themselves are commodities like ISPs.

The actual business models, at this point, aren't even known.

replies(16): >>43662990 #>>43663168 #>>43663741 #>>43663811 #>>43664067 #>>43664234 #>>43664525 #>>43664955 #>>43665493 #>>43665708 #>>43666247 #>>43666842 #>>43668003 #>>43668707 #>>43670096 #>>43670179 #
tonyedgecombe ◴[] No.43662990[source]
>It's be a >$10bn business already.

But not profitable yet.

replies(3): >>43663132 #>>43663400 #>>43663651 #
1. miohtama ◴[] No.43663132[source]
For comparison, Uber is still not profitable after 15 years or so. Give it some time.
replies(3): >>43663139 #>>43663186 #>>43663561 #
2. Tepix ◴[] No.43663139[source]
Time for them to finally disappear
3. jefftk ◴[] No.43663186[source]
Uber had their first profitable year in 2023, and their profit margin was 22% in 2024.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-technologies-full-2024-e...

replies(1): >>43664411 #
4. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43663561[source]
I'm surprised. They pay the drivers a pittance. My ex drove Uber for a while and it wasn't really worth it. Also, for the customers it's usually more expensive and slower than a normal taxi at least here in Spain.

The original idea of ride-sharing made sense but just like airbnb it became an industry and got enshittified.

replies(3): >>43663779 #>>43664388 #>>43670487 #
5. ghaff ◴[] No.43663779[source]
My sense in London is that they’re pretty comparable. I’ll use whichever is more convenient.
replies(1): >>43665363 #
6. Aurornis ◴[] No.43664388[source]
> They pay the drivers a pittance. My ex drove Uber for a while and it wasn't really worth it.

I keep hearing this online, but every time I’ve used an Uber recently it’s driven by someone who says they’ve been doing it for a very long time. Seems clear to me that it is worth it for some, but not worth it if you have other better job options or don’t need the marginal income.

replies(2): >>43665348 #>>43667139 #
7. datavirtue ◴[] No.43664411[source]
They are still FAR in the red. Technically have never turned a profit. Among other famous companies.
replies(2): >>43664515 #>>43666851 #
8. jefftk ◴[] No.43664515{3}[source]
I'm not a finance person, but how is net income of $9.9B for FY 2024 not profit?
replies(1): >>43665112 #
9. ecedeno ◴[] No.43665112{4}[source]
I assume they mean the profits in the past couple years are dwarfed by the losses that came before. Looking at the company's entire history, instead of a single FY.
replies(1): >>43665419 #
10. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43665348{3}[source]
Maybe it differs per country. This was in Spain.
replies(1): >>43666655 #
11. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43665363{3}[source]
They're usually a bit more expensive here than a taxi. It can be beneficial because sometimes they have deals, and I sometimes take one when I have to book it in advance or when I'm afraid there will be delays with a corrsponding high cost. Though Uber tend to hit me with congestion charges then too. At least with a taxi I can ask them to take a different route. The problem with the uber drivers is that they don't know any of the street names here, they just follow the app's navigation. Whereas taxi drivers tend to be much more aware and know the streets and often come up with suggestions.

This also means that they sometimes fleece tourists but when they figure you know the city well they don't dare :) Often if they take one wrong turn I make a scene about frowning and looking out of the window and then they quickly get back on track. Of course that's another usecase where uber would be better, if you don't know the city you're in.

replies(1): >>43667065 #
12. jefftk ◴[] No.43665419{5}[source]
Maybe? But that's not what anyone means when they describe a company as profitable or not.

I was guessing they meant something like the net profit only came from a weird tax thing or something.

replies(1): >>43666992 #
13. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43666655{4}[source]
PS: I know that in Romania it's the opposite. Uber is kinda like a luxury taxi there. Normal taxis have standard rates, but these days it's hardly enough to cover rising fuel prices. So cars are ancient and un a bad state of repair, drivers often trick foreigners. A colleague was even robbed by one. Uber is much more expensive but much safer (and still cheap by western standards).
14. sib ◴[] No.43666851{3}[source]
Uber is a profitable company both in 2023 and - to the tune of billions of dollars - in 2024. Please read their financials if you doubt this statement.
15. UncleEntity ◴[] No.43666992{6}[source]
Seems like the difference between a profitable investment and a profitable company.

They invested tens of billions of dollars in destroying the competition to be able to recently gain a return on that investment. One could either write off that previous spending or calculate it into the totality of "Uber". I don't know how Silicon Valley economics works but, presumably, a lot of that previous spending is now in the form of debt which must be serviced out of the current profits. Not that I'm stating that taking on debt is wrong or anything.

replies(1): >>43667327 #
16. fragmede ◴[] No.43667065{4}[source]
> they sometimes fleece tourists

yeah thanks no, I'm paying for an Uber. For all the complaints over Ubers business practices, it's hard not to forget how bad taxis were. Regulatory capture is a clear failure mode of capitalism and the free market and that is no more shown than by the taxis cab industry.

replies(1): >>43671641 #
17. UncleEntity ◴[] No.43667139{3}[source]
> but not worth it if you have other better job options

Pretty much any service job, really...

When I had occasion to take a ride share in Phoenix I'd interrogate the driver about how much they were getting paid because I drove cabs for years and knew how much I would have gotten paid for the same trip.

Let's just say they were getting paid significantly less than I used to for the same work. If you calculated in the expenses of maintaining a car vs. leasing a cab I expect the difference is even greater.

There were a few times where I had just enough money to take public transportation down to get a cab and then snag a couple cash calls to be able to put gas in the car and eat. Then I could start working on paying off the lease and go home at the end of the day with some cash in my pocket -- there were times (not counting when the Super Bowl was in town) where I made my rent in a single day.

18. jefftk ◴[] No.43667327{7}[source]
To the extent that their past spending was debt, interest on that debt that should already be accounted for in calculating their net income.

But the way it usually works for Silicon Valley companies and other startups is that instead of taking on debt they raise money through selling equity. This is money that doesn't have to be paid back, but it means investors own a large portion of this now-profitable company.

19. theshackleford ◴[] No.43670487[source]
> Also, for the customers it's usually more expensive and slower than a normal taxi

Neither of those things are true where I live.

> at least here in Spain

Well…Spain is Spain. Not the rest of the world.

replies(1): >>43675882 #
20. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43671641{5}[source]
Taxis aren't so bad in most countries. Here in Spain they are plentiful and fine. The same in most other countries I've been to. Only in the Netherlands they are horrible, they are ridiculously expensive because they all drive Mercedeses. As a result nobody uses them because they can't afford them. They're more like a limousine service, not like real taxis.

One time I told one of my Dutch friends I often take a cab to work here in Spain when I'm running late. He thought i was being pompous and showy. But here it's super normal.

Uber (Or cabify which is a local clone and much more popular) here on the other hand is terrible if you don't book it in advance. When I'm standing here on the street it takes 7-10 minutes for them to arrive while I see several taxis passing every minute. So there is just no point. Probably a factor of being unpopular too so the density is low.

I also prefer my money to end up with local people instead of a huge American corporation.

21. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43675882{3}[source]
No but it's like this in most of Europe.

I think Uber in the US is a very different beast. But also because the outlook on life is so different there. I recently agreed with an American visitor that we'd go somewhere and we agreed to go by public transport. When I got there he wanted to get an Uber :') Here in Europe public transport is a very different thing. In many cases the metro is even faster than getting a taxi.

PS: What bothers me the most about Uber and Cabify is that they "estimate" that it will take 2 minutes to get a car to you, and then when I try and book one I get a driver that's 10 minutes away :( :( Then I cancel the trip and the drivers are pissed off. I had one time where I got the same driver I cancelled on earlier and he complained a lot even though I cancelled within 10 seconds when I saw how far away he was.

Anyway I have very few good experiences with these services, I only use them to go to the airport now when I can book it in advance. And never Uber anymore, only Cabify.

replies(1): >>43676301 #
22. theshackleford ◴[] No.43676301{4}[source]
> Anyway I have very few good experiences with these services

For me, and a majority where I live, this is applicable to taxis. Which were known for being dirty, late, expensive, prone to attempting to rip you off, if they turned up at all, etc.

Outside of surge charging (in which they are more expensive) ubers are by and large either cheaper, or the same price. With the difference being that 99% of the time if you request one, its going to turn up. And when it does turn up, you know what your going to pay, not have them take a wrong turn at some point and by "mistake" and decide to charge you double. Or tell you they take card and then start making claims about how suddenly they can't etc.

Sounds like europe gets the bad end of the stick in this regard.

replies(1): >>43682980 #
23. wkat4242 ◴[] No.43682980{5}[source]
Yeah here in Spain the taxis are great. They're plentiful, cheap and efficient. The city is kinda a mess and the rideshare drivers have to drive a route mapped out by the app which often is not optimal. The real taxis know the city well. I think this is why the rideshares are unpopular and thus there's not many of them leading to the long waiting times. They're also spread between different providers, Uber is popular with the tourists only and the locals mostly use Cabify (a local company).

However in Romania on the other hand many taxi drivers are scammers or even criminals (one of my colleagues was robbed by one of them). It's also because the maximum taxi fares are too low to actually make a wage so I can kinda understand so I always tip really well (like double the fare or more which is still nothing). Though if they try to scam me they don't get a cent of course.