92 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 89.5 ms ] thread
Why only Macs? If we think of all PCs and mobile phones running idle, the potential is much larger.
Should have called it “Inferanet” with this idea.

Away this looks like a great idea and might have a chance at solving the economic issue with running nodes for cheap inference and getting paid for it.

They use the TEE to check that the model and code is untampered with. That's a good, valid approach and should work (I've done similar things on AWS with their TEE)

The key question here is how they avoid the outside computer being able to view the memory of the internal process:

> An in-process inference design that embeds the in- ference engine directly in a hardened process, elimi- nating all inter-process communication channels that could be observed, with optional hypervisor mem- ory isolation that extends protection from software- enforced to hardware-enforced via ARM Stage 2 page tables at zero performance cost.[1]

I was under the impression this wasn't possible if you are using the GPU. I could be misled on this though.

[1] https://github.com/Layr-Labs/d-inference/blob/master/papers/...

I have a hard time believing their numbers. If you can pay off a mac mini in 2-4 months, and make $1-2k profit every month after that, why wouldn’t their business model just be buying mac minis?
The numbers are optimistically legit -- it's calculated based purely considering we have demand for all machines at all times. We don't have that right now, but fairly optimistic that people will do it.

That's why we don't recommend purchasing a new machine. Existing machine is no cost for you to run this.

Electricity is one cost, but it will get paid off from every request it receives. Electricity is only deducted when you run an inference. If you have any questions, DM me @gajesh on Twitter.

If you start buying minis, then you need to house, power, and cool them. So you are building a mini data center. If you are building a small data center, economies of scale will drive you to want to build larger and larger. However, this gets expensive and neighbors tend to not like data centers (for good reason). To me this seems like asymmetric warfare against hyper-scalers.
Because their numbers don’t work out. When you do the math on token cost versus inference speed, you get something that barely breaks even even with cheap power.

Also they’ve already launched a crypto token, which is a terrible sign.

Being the middleman is often way more profitable
No provider maintains 100% utilization of GPUs at full rate. Demand is bursty - even if this project is successful, you might expect, e.g., things to be busy during the stock market times when Claude is throwing API errors and then severely underutilized during the same times that Anthropic was offering two-for-one off peak use.

And then there's a hit for overprovisioning in general. If the network is not overprovisioned somewhat, customers won't be able to get requests handled when they want, and they'll flee. But the more overprovisioned it is, the worse it is for compute seller earnings.

I suspect an optimistic view of earnings from a platform like this would be something like 1/8 utilization on a model like Gemma 4. Their calculator estimates my m4 pro mini could earn about $24/month at 3 hours/day on that model. That seems plausible.

Of course these numbers are ridiculous. Mac Mini (let's assume Apple releases M5 Pro) tops Int8 (let's assume it is the same as FP8, which it is not) at ~50 TFLOPs, with Draw Things, we recently developed hybrid NAX + ANE inference, which can get you ~70 TFLOPs.

A H200 gives you ~4 PFLOPs, which is ~60x at only ~40x price (assuming you can get a Mac Mini at $1000). (Not to mention, BTW, RTX PRO 6000 is ~7x price for ~40x more FLOPs).

Your M4 Mac Mini only has ~20 TFLOPs.

Because the "ship software to people, rent their hardware" model has zero up front investment required, presumably. And they don't have to deal with power, cooling, real estate.
That solution actually makes great sense. So Apple won in some strange way again?

Guess there are limitations on size of the models, but if top-tier models will getting democratized I don’t see a reason not to use this API. The only thing that comes to me is data privacy concerns.

I think batch-evals for non-sensitive data has great PMF here.

I thought this was Apple’s plan all along. How is this not already their thing?
I'd love a way to do this locally -- pool all the PCs in our own office for in-office pools of compute. Any suggestions from anyone? We currently run ollama but manually manage the pools
Cool idea. Just some back-of-the-envelope math here (not trusting what's on their site):

My M5 Pro can generate 130 tok/s (4 streams) on Gemma 4 26B. Darkbloom's pricing is $0.20 per Mtok output.

That's about $2.24/day or $67/mo revenue if it's fully utilized 24/7.

Now assuming 50W sustained load, that's about 36 kWh/mo, at ~$.25/kWh approx. $9/mo in costs.

Could be good for lunch money every once in a while! Around $700/yr.

Also this assumes hardware never fails. I learned about this the hard way back when I started mining crypto on my 5700XT way back when.

I figured since I already used it a lot, and I've never had a GPU fail on me, it would be fine.

The fans on it died in a month of constant use, replacing them was more money than what I made on mining.

Generate images requested by randoms on the internet on your hardware.

What could possibly go wrong?

You might not even know it as a user but the payment/distribution here is all built on crypto+stablecoins. This is a great use case for it.
Unfortunately, verifiable privacy is not physically possible on MacBooks of today. Don't let a nice presentation fool you.

Apple Silicon has a Secure Enclave, but not a public SGX/TDX/SEV-style enclave for arbitrary code, so these claims are about OS hardening, not verifiable confidential execution.

It would be nice if it were possible. There's a lot of cool innovations possible beyond privacy.

"These are estimates only. We do not guarantee any specific utilization or earnings. Actual earnings depend on network demand, model popularity, your provider reputation score, and how many other providers are serving the same model.

When your Mac is idle (no inference requests), it consumes minimal power — you don't lose significant money waiting for requests. The electricity costs shown only apply during active inference.

Text models typically see the highest and most consistent demand. Image generation and transcription requests are bursty — high volume during peaks, quiet otherwise."

I cant buy credits - says page could not load
I installed this so you don't have to. It did feel a bit quirky and not super polished. Fails to download the image model. The audio/tts model fails to load.

In 15 minutes of serving Gemma, I got precisely zero actual inference requests, and a bunch of health checks and two attestations.

At the moment they don't have enough sustained demand to justify the earning estimates.

You can see in their stats view they have a lot of providers/nodes connected but practically no actual demand/consumers. They just launched and I'm sure get providers was top of their agenda, but it's essentially unusable as a provider unless they perform some serious lift to get actual paying customers.
I received the same error, but it was followed by this line in the logs, which might explain the lack of inference requests assume there is actual demand...

WARN STT backend failed health check — model will NOT be advertised

I disabled the audio model (had to remove it, it was so buggy) and then started up with a text only model. Serving started without error. The system simply has no requests. The economics seem like a mirage anyway.
Any news after 10 days here? Did anyone successfully tried either side of this?
Apple should build this, and start giving away free Macs subsidized by idle usage.
Is this named after the 2011 split album with Grimes and d'Eon?
They are almost claiming FHE, isn't it just a matter of creating the right tool to get the generated tokens from RAM before it gets encrypted for transfer. How is it fundamentally different than chutes?
I could imagine this working for the openclaw community if the price is right
That was my first thought too especially for talks that aren’t particularly important like daily digests of online things
I'm not sure how the economics works out. Pricing for AI inference is based on supply/demand/scarcity. If your hardware is scarce, that means low supply; combine with high demand, it's now valuable. But what happens if you enable every spare Mac on the planet to join the game? Now your supply is high, which means now it's less valuable. So if this becomes really popular, you don't make much money. But if it doesn't become somewhat popular, you don't get any requests, and don't make money. The only way they could ensure a good return would be to first make it popular, then artificially lower the number of hosts.
Like the concept. This is not a business - should be an open source GitHub repo maybe.

They lost me with just one microcopy - “start earning”. Huge red signal.

latest (v0.3.8) tar doesn't contain image-bank or gRPCServerCLI dependencies so installer fails.
Until we have breakthroughs in homomorphic encryption compute, I won't trust such privacy claims