6 ms·

Kinda dumb that I didn't pour every bit of cash to their stock when chatgpt was released... it was kinda obvious... but so it goes.

cdelsolar 3y ago
You can still do it
Workaccount2 3y ago
I was telling my girfriend this last night, hah. I was aware that ChatGPT was a gamechanger when it was released. I was also aware that Nvidia was the only one making the hardware. But I'm just not the type to immediately jump to "How can I best profit from this?" Rather than researching stocks, I researched transformers more.
- rvnx 3y ago
  The issue is that the market doesn't necessarily react rationally. The fact that OpenAI valuation raises was very understandable (but not easy to invest in practice + the corporate structure is shady). However, Nvidia, it's a very optimistic hype, as the cards are very likely to get replaced with more specialized AI chips in the near-term. Probably by Apple first, then whoever wakes up. Also, once you built your big datacenter with all these cards, then you don't renew them every year.
  - chii 3y ago
    > market doesn't necessarily react rationally. market reacts rationally - just not your brand of rational.
- wing-_-nuts 3y ago
  I gotta be honest, I looked at chat gpt, thought just doing LLM inference is not that hard, someone will produce an ASIC that destroys nvidia's margins here. You could honestly make a hedge fund by listening to me pontificate things and then betting opposite of me. I have been bearish on MS, twitter, dropbox, bitcoin, the list goes on. It's admirable how I am so consistently wrong.
  - Workaccount2 3y ago
    I guess to be fair, I was also bearish on Nvidia when it hit $250. So probably would have been dealing with pain since I likely would have sold after those 50% gains. Same thing with BTC. I tried to buy 20,000 in 2010. Was too much hassle back then so I gave up. But even if I went through with it. I would have sold the moment I turned $20 in $200. Much less hold past $500 or $1000.
    - c22 3y ago
      I feel this. I sold the bitcoin I had mined in 2010 for around $800 in 2012 and thought I was an absolute genius.
  - tanseydavid 3y ago
    >> someone will produce an ASIC that destroys nvidia's margins here I am no expert but it sure seems like Groq might be on to something with their LPU (language processing unit).
  - Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
    > someone will produce an ASIC that destroys nvidia's margins here. From what I understand, if someone made an ASIC for LLM inference, such a device would effectively have the specific model locked in. You wouldn't be able to update the ASIC for newer versions of the model that alter the architecture. At best, you might be able to make one that allows you to update the weights. I'm also not sure how cheaply you could produce such an ASIC. One that runs a 7B parameter model probably wouldn't be too expensive, but something that could rival GPT-4 would be.
    - chii 3y ago
      i imagine that ASIC of such types would be analogue, rather than digital. Or use a different substrate than silicon - may be light/laser based? It'd have to be quite revolutionary, rather than evolutionary.
tcbawo 3y ago
Any weighted Nasdaq ETF will have a large component of NVDA.
jejeyyy77 3y ago
Well, do you think that this is the end game for ChatGPT/other models?
rafaelero 3y ago
I remember thinking back then "well, how would I know better than the market?". Still, I did buy some NVIDIA stocks, which payed off great. My thought process comes down to: do I think people are as bullish as I think they should be about AI? Every time I come to Hacker News, I still answer "no". As long as I keep seeing people not acknowledging the full potential of AI, I will keep buying.
- Symmetry 3y ago
  The semi-strong from of the Efficient Market Hypothesis says that the market has already incorporated all publicly available information. But "publicly available" is doing a lot of work there. What constitutes an impressive ability for an AI[1], how hard is it for a big company to port it's tech stack from CUDA to ROCm, and things like that are public in some sense but not really in the sense of necessarily being priced in enough that you shouldn't trade on your sense of those. But on the flip side, there are a lot of things that might be obvious to an MBA with decades of experience that might be opaque to me so please don't go all in on any bet. [1]https://xkcd.com/1425/ https://xkcd.com/1425/
dehrmann 3y ago
Seems obvious that AMD gets their shit together and releases a viable competitor, but that's a bet I'd never take.
- anon291 3y ago
  I've had AMD reach out to me to recruit me to join their AI compilers / software team (my area of expertise), and frankly, I'm not sure they can pull it off. The hiring space is extremely competitive and they're not in a rush at all. Just my experience. They demanded candidates fly out within weeks, whereas NVIDIA and other competitors are making hiring decisions within days.
userabchn 3y ago
I was at Nvidia's GTC conference in 2010 and my friend who was with me suggested that we should buy Nvidia stock. I was sceptical as I felt it was highly likely that Intel, which had so many more resources, would soon release a superior product, and so didn't invest.

cdelsolar 3y ago

You can still do it

Workaccount2 3y ago

I was telling my girfriend this last night, hah. I was aware that ChatGPT was a gamechanger when it was released. I was also aware that Nvidia was the only one making the hardware. But I'm just not the type to immediately jump to "How can I best profit from this?" Rather than researching stocks, I researched transformers more.

rvnx 3y ago
The issue is that the market doesn't necessarily react rationally. The fact that OpenAI valuation raises was very understandable (but not easy to invest in practice + the corporate structure is shady). However, Nvidia, it's a very optimistic hype, as the cards are very likely to get replaced with more specialized AI chips in the near-term. Probably by Apple first, then whoever wakes up. Also, once you built your big datacenter with all these cards, then you don't renew them every year.
- chii 3y ago
  > market doesn't necessarily react rationally. market reacts rationally - just not your brand of rational.
wing-_-nuts 3y ago
I gotta be honest, I looked at chat gpt, thought just doing LLM inference is not that hard, someone will produce an ASIC that destroys nvidia's margins here. You could honestly make a hedge fund by listening to me pontificate things and then betting opposite of me. I have been bearish on MS, twitter, dropbox, bitcoin, the list goes on. It's admirable how I am so consistently wrong.
- Workaccount2 3y ago
  I guess to be fair, I was also bearish on Nvidia when it hit $250. So probably would have been dealing with pain since I likely would have sold after those 50% gains. Same thing with BTC. I tried to buy 20,000 in 2010. Was too much hassle back then so I gave up. But even if I went through with it. I would have sold the moment I turned $20 in $200. Much less hold past $500 or $1000.
  - c22 3y ago
    I feel this. I sold the bitcoin I had mined in 2010 for around $800 in 2012 and thought I was an absolute genius.
- tanseydavid 3y ago
  >> someone will produce an ASIC that destroys nvidia's margins here I am no expert but it sure seems like Groq might be on to something with their LPU (language processing unit).
- Sohcahtoa82 3y ago
  > someone will produce an ASIC that destroys nvidia's margins here. From what I understand, if someone made an ASIC for LLM inference, such a device would effectively have the specific model locked in. You wouldn't be able to update the ASIC for newer versions of the model that alter the architecture. At best, you might be able to make one that allows you to update the weights. I'm also not sure how cheaply you could produce such an ASIC. One that runs a 7B parameter model probably wouldn't be too expensive, but something that could rival GPT-4 would be.
  - chii 3y ago
    i imagine that ASIC of such types would be analogue, rather than digital. Or use a different substrate than silicon - may be light/laser based? It'd have to be quite revolutionary, rather than evolutionary.

tcbawo 3y ago

Any weighted Nasdaq ETF will have a large component of NVDA.

jejeyyy77 3y ago

Well, do you think that this is the end game for ChatGPT/other models?

rafaelero 3y ago

I remember thinking back then "well, how would I know better than the market?". Still, I did buy some NVIDIA stocks, which payed off great. My thought process comes down to: do I think people are as bullish as I think they should be about AI? Every time I come to Hacker News, I still answer "no". As long as I keep seeing people not acknowledging the full potential of AI, I will keep buying.

Symmetry 3y ago
The semi-strong from of the Efficient Market Hypothesis says that the market has already incorporated all publicly available information. But "publicly available" is doing a lot of work there. What constitutes an impressive ability for an AI[1], how hard is it for a big company to port it's tech stack from CUDA to ROCm, and things like that are public in some sense but not really in the sense of necessarily being priced in enough that you shouldn't trade on your sense of those. But on the flip side, there are a lot of things that might be obvious to an MBA with decades of experience that might be opaque to me so please don't go all in on any bet. [1]https://xkcd.com/1425/ https://xkcd.com/1425/

dehrmann 3y ago

Seems obvious that AMD gets their shit together and releases a viable competitor, but that's a bet I'd never take.

anon291 3y ago
I've had AMD reach out to me to recruit me to join their AI compilers / software team (my area of expertise), and frankly, I'm not sure they can pull it off. The hiring space is extremely competitive and they're not in a rush at all. Just my experience. They demanded candidates fly out within weeks, whereas NVIDIA and other competitors are making hiring decisions within days.

userabchn 3y ago

I was at Nvidia's GTC conference in 2010 and my friend who was with me suggested that we should buy Nvidia stock. I was sceptical as I felt it was highly likely that Intel, which had so many more resources, would soon release a superior product, and so didn't invest.