Electricity might be a good analogy - but for the other side of this argument.
replyIn the US, (nearly) full electrification wasn't achieved until the late 1940's/early 1950's - a process of nearly a century. (A moment of personal trivia, my great grandfather worked on crews electrifying rural areas of the midwest.)
We already have SOTA local inference devices in everyone’s pocket, which also provide high bandwidth access to SOTA data center inference at what is rapidly becoming commodity pricing.
replyWhat comparable gap is there to bridge?
>My point is, there’s no chance of a “haves and have nots” emerging, any more than electricity turned out that way in the modern world.
replyEnergy costs vary widely across the world and that has enormous capacity for the economies of different countries and their industrial capacity.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/cost-of-e...
replyElectricity looks pretty even. Higher in Europe but they can afford that.
Due to purchasing power parity, it is actually much hhigher in poorer countries, in that they are absolutely still asking the have nots.
replyWhen something is expensive specifically because a country is poor and everything is harder to buy, that expense isn't making inequality worse.
replyI am talking about have nots at a nation scale here. At level of British empire.
replyI'm not sure what that means. Every country has electricity and any country can get GPUs if it wants them.
reply(And the profit from selling GPUs isn't haves versus have nots, it's a couple companies versus the entire world.)
[dead]
reply