←back to thread

How OpenAI uses complex and circular deals to fuel its multibillion-dollar rise

(www.nytimes.com)
387 points reaperducer | 1 comments | 31 Oct 25 13:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.216s | source
Show context
SubiculumCode ◴[31 Oct 25 14:14 UTC] No.45772210[source]▶
Given that AI is a national security matter now, I'd expect the U.S.A to step in and rescue certain companies in the event of a crash. However, I'd give higher chances to NVIDIA than OpenAI. Weights are easily transferrable and the expertise is in the engineers, but ability to continue making advanced chips is not as easily transferred.
replies(4): >>45772241 #>>45772328 #>>45772343 #>>45772651 #
embedding-shape ◴[31 Oct 25 14:16 UTC] No.45772241[source]▶
Why is ML knowledge "in the engineers" while chip manufacturing apparently sits in the company/hardware/something else than the engineers/humans?
replies(6): >>45772325 #>>45772346 #>>45772355 #>>45772369 #>>45772507 #>>45772729 #
jimbokun ◴[31 Oct 25 15:01 UTC] No.45772729[source]▶
Chip designs have strong IP protections.

AI models do not. Sure you can't just copy the exact floating point values without permission. But with enough capital you can train a model just as good, as the training and inference techniques are well known.

replies(1): >>45773420 #
1. embedding-shape ◴[31 Oct 25 15:49 UTC] No.45773420[source]▶
> But with enough capital you can train a model just as good, as the training and inference techniques are well known

You're not alone in believing just money can train a good model, and I've already answered elsewhere why things aren't so easy as you believe, but besides this, where are y'all getting that from? Is there some popular social media influencer that keeps parroting this or where it comes from? Clearly you're not involved in those processes/workflows yourself, then you wouldn't claim it's just a money problem, so where are you all getting this from?