The data center side is so bloated anything that eats into it is a huge negative. Their data center business brings in 20x the gpu market. Local open weight models will be what pops the bubble and China will do anything in it's power to enable that pop.
There’s plenty of competition that would be happy to attack them from below, though…
I think memory and ssd design will end up being incorporated into the overall design of the SOC chip. And several companies that can probably will sponsor a existing company or build a foundry going forward. Once again, change or die.
Gaming > Bitcoin > LLMs > Robotics
Jensen's job is to just be one step ahead of the market dynamics to keep the investor dollars flowing.
“Jensen’s job is to just be one step ahead of the market” — how is that a “just”? That’s arguably one of the most difficult things to do reliably (judging by how much payout it can give you). Feels like saying he’s making “just” billions of dollars.
Being the default high-throughput device is an incredibly strong position. We could say he’s a genius at making money, but really that’s downstream of the ability to keep CUDA relevant.
This assumes a) AI is a zero-sum game, and b) we're actually talking about on-prem AI will replace cloud-based AI. I think neither statements are true.
AI is like compute: we'll need all sorts of it, in various sizes, everywhere. I'm sure Nvidia whats to own all the workloads.
On the other hand, I do think open weight, like open source, will win in general.
My only concern is if we can limit the economic impact from lowering investments and causing a 40% market collapse circa 2008/9.
You mean they resisted the idea trying to protect their legacy business, and it ended up all but killing them?
35 years to get back to status quo. Putting a bullet in a golden goose is often considered a bad idea. Everyone is happy they are dead, but if you can't understand why they might try to keep the corpse alive you have never looked at the numbers.
At its peak Kodak was one of the (the?) most well known brands on the entire planet. Anywhere in the world if someone snapped a photo Kodak was more than likely taking a cut, coming and going. They employed as many people in Rochester alone as any digital camera company does today internationally.
Sure it could have been managed better but they were always doomed for a fall. They were a chemical company entering a digital age. Does anybody even care who makes the sensors in iPhones?
Having the first portable-ish digital camera they could have seen the true value of Fairchild's CCD business, got a stake/bought it/replicated done whatever it took to push the frontier of digital imaging and became the Kodak (old, film-era Kodak) of electronic imaging?
There's no comparable business today because all the things they could have invested in ended up being taken up by different companies, they had the R&D culture, revenue, and distribution. I don't see why they couldn't have been category defining.
IBM was the same way, ironically, the fourth Yankee clipper company had to be dragged into using two types of glasses sitting on the shelf that were patented/created in the early 1960s, both of which later became known as gorilla glass. Steve Jobs had to call them (Corning) multiple times to get them to finally let him use it on the iPhone. Imagine if Steve had contracted out to some other glass company in the far east?
Only if you ignore the digital camera sector responsible for probably 99% of all digital photos taken…
The CEO would likely have been shot or arrested.
Classical example is Microsoft actively undermining mobile because it threatened selling Windows or enterprise licenses.
Or Yahoo fighting Google's model because the latter model's didn't depend on taking enterprise deals to rank results.
Definitely not cheap for individuals, but well within SME territory. There are countless small-town, family-owned businesses that had higher startup costs than a hypothetical Kimi-R-Us, Inc.
They do report it separately from consumer and business sales of gpus used in PCs.
I know a tomato is a fruit but will still be annoyed when someone is pedantic about it because that's dumb.
When the mobile phone is eventually integrated into the human body or some other silly application in the future that will annoy me as well. Congrats on being pedantic.
You might not ever admit your argument is dumb but tomatoes are fruit is stupid.
If you want to understand their reproductive biology, you are stuck understanding them as fruit.
It's maybe telling that you bring up a confusion that is harmful instead of explaining why grouping massively parallel processors under the term "gpu" is harmful.