How much Anthropic and Cursor spend on Amazon Web Services

Just a reminder, Ed Zitron is neither an AI researcher, nor an Engineer, nor a Financial Analyst, nor an Economist nor an Insider and has ZERO clue in multiple dimensions (technology, investing, unit economics, growth, TAM) to analyze any of this

Correct. And yet, he's provided some of the most level headed takes on the current LLM boom, to the point where FT Alphaville link to his analysis of the economics.

The jury is still out there if his analysis are level-headed or not. He says things that *some* people want to hear, but that's not level-headed

E.g

What is the unit cost of serving a Token? It is the cost of electricity + amortized cost of GPU (GPUs would have been Capex, but because of their fast depreciation rate, you can claim they should be Opex). Given this cost structure, every SOTA labs (Google, Anthropic and OpenAI) are profitable and actually have high-margins 50-60%.

With this margin and growth, the frontier labs can be profitable anytime they want to. But they are sacrificing profitability for growth (as they should be)

Where is Ed's analysis about this? Either he is disingenuous or clueless. Remember people who voluntarily subscribe to Ed, are coming from wanting to hear what they believe.

If he is level-headed, show me an Ed article that is positive about AI

> If he is level-headed, show me an Ed article that is positive about AI

Why should those two things go together?

If 1 Billion people voluntarily use a product and many claim to be productive, there must be something good about the product right?

But I guess Ed Zitron has found his audience

His argument is not that AI is not useful, it's that it's not financially sustainable at the current prices being charged for it - and additionally AI start-ups have 0 moat. Both of which likely are true.

Unfortunately, his argument very often happens to be that AI is not useful, that there are no customers for it, that AI coding agents do not work...

I happen to agree with the overall sentiment (that AI buildout is overextending the tech sector and the financial markets), but he is utterly fixated on the evils of AI and unable to admit either the current usefulness or the future potential of the technology. This does not make him look like an honest broker.

The rambling nature of his posts also makes it harder to properly argue against them as he keeps repeating the same points over and over; some of them are decent but there is certainly a gish gallop feeling to the whole thing.