Hacker News Reader

Comment by angulardragon03 | Hacker News Reader

And if they get too good, they risk harming or otherwise killing their golden geese (their customers), who they are heavily invested in.

View on HN

How? Imagine an open-weight model comes out that is somehow better than proprietary solutions. Now the marginal cost for the consumer is just the cost of renting the inference hardware, without having to pay the overhead of the owner of a proprietary model. And because it is cheaper, more customers want to use it, and Nvidia will sell the providers the inference hardware that they need.

1. No open ai and anthropic means no buying gpus to train. Now nvidia spends money on hardware training their own models. Opportunity cost plus expense.

2. Any open models created from this will not necessarily need their silicon, see apple mlx.

1. I don’t think that’s a very strong argument. OpenAI and Anthropic don’t buy the vast majority of GPUs they use they rent capacity.

Nvidia could just the same rent those GPUs out for inference and actually have way better margins than they do right now. Antitrust and putting all your eggs in one basket are why they don’t, similar to TSMC.

2. Neither do AI labs. See Anthropic buying TPUs, deploying with AMD. OpenAI on Maia, Cerebras, their own wafers.

It’s not about whether or not Nvidia will be able to sell hardware to these providers - it’s about literally killing companies they are financially invested in.

Why would you invest money in a company, and then enter the market to compete with them?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com