Hacker News Reader

Comment by areddyyt | Hacker News Reader

We're targeting the edge market first, such as NVIDIA's Jetson line, because it's far less supported/focussed on. In our experience, whenever we did training runs on H100 clusters with x86, any pip package would be easily installable, and a wide array of software just worked. This is not the case in Jetson, where we constantly have to rebuild packages from source, and in general, NVIDIA will only release a better board every five years. As for the second part of your question, we agree. Much of our work has been trying to make switching to our software layer straightforward (a single line of code). The ideal endgame is that, given an ONNX file, we can parse the generated node tree and determine if our hardware supports all the nodes. Of course, this is assuming we have a large enough share of the market using our software, so we know what operations we need to support on the hardware side of things.

View on HN

I cannot see any way of building HW profitably for the Jetson market. You are really competing with Raspberry PI, not Jetson, IMO. I mean, I'm no expert, but I would suggest doing a deep dive on your business plan if you intend to target the small hardware world rather than spending any time designing HW or SW. Then reduce your estimate by at least half since doing anything in that embedded/edge world has many more technical issues.

In general, Jetson has quite a large market. Vehicle companies use automotive-rated Jetson Orins, and defense companies also use Jetson Orins to power ML applications on the edge (Anduril). Many of the companies we currently talk to are robotics companies that are forced to use Jetsons because they are both the least of the bad options and the only edge compute provider with enough juice to run larger transformer models.

And the auto and Defense markets are so easy to enter! /s

Both of these markets have long lead times, tight HW build times, and move incredibly slowly. They are not the kind of markets that like using stuff from new companies with no history. Again, I'm no expert, but I'd say you need to be concentrating on sales and market research now.

With respect it doesn't sound like you know much about any of these businesses. This startup is extremely early, the road to silicon is long, and there is a lot of external change and learning by doing that will happen between here and there. This is them getting started and based on my related work experience I think it's pretty interesting.

We are not under the illusion these markets are easy to enter. Still, we believe providing an effortless and compatible experience for edge ML computing is a strong competitive advantage. We have not met anyone who likes using Jetsons yet, unlike A100/H100s in the server market.

Edit: I should note that if it weren't for Dusty and his docker image generating GitHub repo for Jetson, we would have spent weeks trying to get our kernels and optimized models shipped to customers.

What's your point? Is it that one shouldn't attempt to enter a market just because it's difficult? Or are you trying to educate the founders about something obvious that they likely have already spent 1000x more time thinking about than you?

This 1000%. Just because a business in a tangential area didn't work, doesn't mean innovation shouldn't happen

I think the only way this could work is if you had the backing of one of the major LLM providers who decided that your ideas are worth doing a PoC. That way you actually have a client on board before you spend all the money. I know you guys probably like the designing of the HW and SW, and maybe the implementation of both, but really, what you need now is to do sales.

There are multiple ways to run a business like this.

1. Go deep on the tech, there are funders who will want equity stakes in risky startups because they operate in adjacent markets. It's often cheaper to invest 1MM on a startup than internal R&D activities. If it has promising results, those same investors may ramp up their spend or pivot to an acquisition strategy.

2. Get early customers, if you have 1-10 large enterprises with a committed spend - then you are likely golden. However as nice as this option sounds, there are few avenues to get this type of commitment. If you are in the fortunate position of knowing the exec/founding/investor team of a large LLM provider - it's possible. But easier said than done.

3. Build it and they will come, business strategies take time to develop - maybe that time is poorly spent. Build the best version of your product and someone might take it up. There are a few investors who will take a flyer on this type of founder mentality. Benefit to the investor is that they can get a much larger equity stake/board position in exchange for the early creative freedom. If it works out, the investor can get a lot of alpha. A card which handled LLM inference at 1/100th the cost of an H100 could produce quite a bit of value for the right buyer.

The most realistic and likely scenario is:

4. Do the technical work to get it a little bit beyond just an idea and then get acqui-hired by a large company who has the resources to push this.

So if I was them I would be doing thought experiments on how this technology could benefit a whole range of businesses e.g. gaming consoles, televisions etc. Not many people would've guessed LG acquiring Palm for example.

Agreed. We don't plan on making hardware until there is enough demand from customers to make it economically viable.

I'm currently working on a portable computer vision project using Pi/Jetson with some Luxonis camera modules and I completely see where you're headed. In the long-game I think you could capture hw accelerated robotics CV.

Why not target the enthusiast first? The buzz created around something interesting an "amateur" cooked up may be what you need. The investment involved with creating dev hardware should be minimal, correct?

I may be wrong, but from few other enthusiast niches I conclude, enthusiasts number is very little to feed hardware development. - Need millions sells, but really most real project have made thousands sells.

And this is long known - even Raspberry born for other market, fortunately, was not just killed but conversed to target enthusiast and even now incomplete project.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com