Hacker News Reader

Comment by qaq | Hacker News Reader

Yes 65B ARR that Anthropic has is clear indication there is no path to revenue.

Sorry, I should have said "profit path", good catch! They have revenue, but their cost scales with revenue and they're losing more than they are making.

See: https://www.wheresyoured.at/brokenomics/ for an interesting write-up on the economics of AI.

If people are sure they can always short NVIDIA

Their costs do not scale linearly with revenue. Inference is expensive, but it's a variable cost. Anthropic's overall costs include massive fixed costs in training, which are the same regardless of usage.

It's easy to falsify the claim with a simple experiment: imagine they had no customer at all, $0 in revenue. Their costs would still be massive. If the claim were true, $0 revenue should mean $0 costs, right?

How much money does that revenue cost though? If I had to steel-man GPs argument I'd ask for profits rather than revenues.

We will see once they go public Dario did claim profit margin on inference is 40% if memory serves me right

That's convenient accounting. The reality is that they can't stop training since they risk losing customers if they do so. So they shouldn't factor it out of profitability analysis.

A lot of factors there we will see how it plays out.

Yes Dario is well known for his honesty

hence the bit about us learning the actual state of things once they are a public company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com