upvote

points

by typ1 days ago |
comments
upvoteby nr3781 days ago|
next
[-]
> The frontier LLM labs run on a huge fixed cost and very low marginal cost.

> Imagine that you want to buy a few B300s to run GLM 5.2 and rent the service out to other people. How could this business be viable and sustainable in the first place?

My understanding is the frontier labs have huge fixed costs and relatively low marginal costs because they have to bear the cost of training the model/R&D, and then amortise that cost over their userbase.

By contrast, if I buy a few B300s and run GLM5.2 and rent the service out to other people, I can be profitable at a comparatively very small scale because I got the model for free.

reply
upvoteby Gareth3211 days ago|
prev|
[-]
I agree, but there is prestige to consider. Many people are motivated to buy the best, even if it's much more expensive. "We're building a mission critical application here. Sure the API costs are much higher, but it's worth it."
reply
upvoteby mattmatheus1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Quite a lot of people think they're far better engineers than they really are, myself included. I've gotten better over the past few years at realizing that AI writes better code than me, which has made it easier for me to stick to architecture and let the (working) code be what it is.
reply
upvoteby echelon1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I could spend $1000/day with Fable and it would be worth it. It has much deeper systems thinking, enabling me to trust it to follow my instructions and not fuck things up.

1. That confidence and quality is worth the price.

2. We're accelerating at lightning speed now. If you don't spend, someone else will and they'll eat your cake.

We're nearing the point where you could spin up an entire YC startup in a day. That changes the economics of everything.

reply
upvoteby lgl1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I hear this all the time lately. Things like AI X or LLM Y can create a fully working company like "BigCorp XYZ" in N days/hours etc.

But is speed of creation really the golden goose here? A few skilled and motivated individuals could also do (and have been doing) that.

Sure, maybe they take a few months instead of days or weeks, but AFAIK, having a product is just a tiny bit of the battle, finding customers, product market fit, and actually growing it is where the gold is so I'd argue that you'd be better off building the product with a $100 day LLM and spend the other $900 on marketing.

AI won't automatically make everybody business gurus and every LLM generated company a unicorn.

reply
upvoteby koolala1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Maybe YC could just give Fable 2 or 3 the funding directly. Sounds like the only thing left will be market control. The only winners being hardware gatekeepers and the investors in them.
reply
upvoteby echelon1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Depends on whether open source can keep up. If not, this is 100% the future.
reply
upvoteby cbg01 days ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
> We're accelerating at lightning speed now.

Accelerating how much slop you can output? A better model will still produce slop for your feature factory that pumps out software which nobody is interested in buying.

reply
upvoteby echelon1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I'm at a 3M run rate in 4 months. Because I'm solving real problems.

You don't seem like an entrepreneur. Why are you on HN?

YC wants people to build AI startups. You're here shitting on them. Half of this community is. You're all a bunch of old men grumpy at the new tools.

I'll offer my own analysis: if you're not using AI very effectively, you won't have a career in computing in a few years.

reply
upvoteby nickthegreek1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You don't need to be an entrepreneur to be here. The majority of viewers certainly are not.
reply
upvoteby cbg013 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I'm neither an old man, nor am I grumpy at the new tools. I use AI daily, I'm just not deluded into thinking AI is more capable than it is, or myself for that matter.
reply