they would if they could, their investors are seething already.
22x more to be exact
i think the main consensus here is that the actual performance is not indicative of the benchmark performance (which supposedly outperforms the previous iterations)
i'm not sure why there's a need for comparison here. both are not saints and you shouldn't trust any of them anyway
[dead]
I think the (non-definitive) evidence is that the chinese models are always just slightly behind the publically released US models, and never ahead.
China is still quite far from monopolizing hardware production
most of the bubble right now is fueled from circular financing of Anthropic and OpenAI
100b sounds implausible if you consider that anthropic's revenue is only expected to reach 100b this year, 100m is more likely.
where are the cheaper chinese models?
source? most benchmarks show "smart" routing producing near-identical accuracy and 50-75% cheaper costs.
i think plenty of people don't want to be forced to using just Claude and ChatGPT
they have no reason to do that to harm their reputation if their goal is profit, in which in this case it is.
this would never work if the core business model requires your flagship product to be best-in-class.
such a business plan has not yet created economic value, being able to roll out features at rocket speed is not a huge determinant of a startup's success.
sam and dario would be extremely happy
why would you even hire 2 AI friendly people when you could just prompt it yourself? we wouldn't even need you anymore
we are already at the point where AI proponents are planning to have the review cycle be replaced by llms
fraud that cannot be reliably be prevented, which makes the business model in-question fall into 'questionable' category.
good, then the money could be potentially put to better use
The official reasoning they use is sanctioning 'intellectual theft' due to distillation.
VCs have been horseshit for some time and throwing money at horseshit startups to increase their AUM, their incentive structures are fundamentally misaligned with their clients.
Why would model progress slowing be necessarily bad for China?
I believe they will last until they IPO, and not long after that. $200/mo plans are not good for their P&L when their users using $10000 worth api credits. That's -98% margin loss per user.
until they put their money where their mouth is
they would if they could, their investors are seething already.
22x more to be exact
i think the main consensus here is that the actual performance is not indicative of the benchmark performance (which supposedly outperforms the previous iterations)
i'm not sure why there's a need for comparison here. both are not saints and you shouldn't trust any of them anyway
[dead]
I think the (non-definitive) evidence is that the chinese models are always just slightly behind the publically released US models, and never ahead.
China is still quite far from monopolizing hardware production
most of the bubble right now is fueled from circular financing of Anthropic and OpenAI
100b sounds implausible if you consider that anthropic's revenue is only expected to reach 100b this year, 100m is more likely.
where are the cheaper chinese models?
source? most benchmarks show "smart" routing producing near-identical accuracy and 50-75% cheaper costs.
i think plenty of people don't want to be forced to using just Claude and ChatGPT
they have no reason to do that to harm their reputation if their goal is profit, in which in this case it is.
this would never work if the core business model requires your flagship product to be best-in-class.
such a business plan has not yet created economic value, being able to roll out features at rocket speed is not a huge determinant of a startup's success.
sam and dario would be extremely happy
why would you even hire 2 AI friendly people when you could just prompt it yourself? we wouldn't even need you anymore
we are already at the point where AI proponents are planning to have the review cycle be replaced by llms
fraud that cannot be reliably be prevented, which makes the business model in-question fall into 'questionable' category.
good, then the money could be potentially put to better use
The official reasoning they use is sanctioning 'intellectual theft' due to distillation.
VCs have been horseshit for some time and throwing money at horseshit startups to increase their AUM, their incentive structures are fundamentally misaligned with their clients.
Why would model progress slowing be necessarily bad for China?
I believe they will last until they IPO, and not long after that. $200/mo plans are not good for their P&L when their users using $10000 worth api credits. That's -98% margin loss per user.
until they put their money where their mouth is