4 ms·

I think that most people are underestimating Nvidia strategy. Their bet is that AI will unlock robotics use and they don't want to be simply compute providers,

I think that most people are underestimating Nvidia strategy. Their bet is that AI will unlock robotics use and they don't want to be simply compute providers, they want to innovate on the whole chain, software, hardware, services, everything. Their position is quite unique as their R&D is basically financed by their future competitors, they are making bank while going where the puck will be.

nthingtohide 2y ago
I think Nvidia should try to create an compute-analogue of wifi routers where computation will be offloaded to smart-home gpu-servers. This strategy will cement their future for eternity.
- dartos 2y ago
  Why sell to consumers when you can sell to large corporations at 10x the price?
  - talldayo 2y ago
    Because consumers will pay ~3-5x MSRP if the hype is big enough.
    - jszymborski 2y ago
      Corps aren't impervious to hype either.
- david-gpu 2y ago
  Something in that spirit is already making progress: compute attached to cell phone towers, called "edge computing". Because you are pooling computer resources across many more users you have better amortized cost than if you had a workstation on every home that was idle 99% of the time. Of course, latency and bandwidth to the cell tower is worse than wifi, but better than if the compute is done on a remote server. I have no idea of which model will succeed for which use cases, but the idea is sound.
  - giancarlostoro 2y ago
    Not sure how well this would scale if every users needing to compute all at once. Which all it takes is some meme new app that requires heavy computation and then everyone downloads it.
    - david-gpu 2y ago
      It has the same scalability issues and the same scalability solutions as cell towers themselves, doesn't it? Densely populated areas have more cell towers and thus smaller cells. Again: which computation paradigm works best depends on the use case. It is not an all or nothing situation.
  - nthingtohide 2y ago
    Smart mirror, smart appliances, smart robots (of various kinds), all could benefit from such a central compute server which can work without internet. All appliances will have voice interface, and will require heavy intelligence so it is better if the model is downloaded to a central place at home. This model also means all home appliances can be equally smart with no restriction on form factor of the appliances themselves. Nvidia could model itself around current mobile companies selling OS, models, everything in a nice compute-rack package.
- Teever 2y ago
  I think there's a definite itch to scratch with this kind of stuff and you can see hobbyists already tinkering on the edges with things like home assistant and the homelabs community. As much as there are market drivers to make the cloud attractive to businesses and legitimate reasons why cloud solutions are better than alternatives there is a real desire in a growing number of people to have a solution that they can tinker with but that also has a polished UI so they don't have to tinker with it when they don't want to.
- penjelly 2y ago
  funny I landed on this idea myself but ended up thinking it had no value
amelius 2y ago
> they don't want to be simply compute providers I'm still surprised they did not create an App Store for AI. Basically lock everything down and make developers pay a % of their revenue, Apple style.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > Basically lock everything down and make developers pay a % of their revenue, Apple style At enterprise scale, locked down marketplaces don't work. They act as an forcing factor for larger organizations to build in house because no one wants vendor lock-in or to lose money via an arbitrage. This is a major reason why you'll see large deals pushing for enhanced customization options or API parity, as larger customers have the ability to push back against vendor lock-in. Furthermore, a relatively open market (eg. NGC) acts as a loss-leader by allowing a community to develop using a corporate standard, thus allowing you to build stickiness without directly impacting a customer's bottom-line Fundamentally, a company driven by Enterprise revenue (eg. Nvidia) will have a different marketplace structure from a B2C product such as Apple's App Store where purchasers have little power.
  - amelius 2y ago
    > At enterprise scale, locked down marketplaces don't work. If this was true, we'd have more mobile computing platforms. Large enterprises publish in Apple's AppStore.
    - alephnerd 2y ago
      > Large enterprises publish in Apple's AppStore. Purchasers from Apple's App Store are primarily individual consumers. It is a B2C play. Monetizing an Nvidia marketplace such as NGC would be foolhardy as the primary users/"purchasers" are organizations with budgets and procurement power. It is an Enterprise B2B player. In enterprise sales, the power differential between (mid- and upper-market) customers and vendors is in the customer's favor, as they have significant buying power and thus a higher user acquisition cost. The upside is revenue is much higher, margins are better, and you can differentiate on product as commodification is difficult. This is less so in consumer facing sales as customers have significantly weaker buying power, but conversely have a much lower user acquisition cost at scale. Hence, a growth-based GTM approach is critical, as you need customers in aggregate to truly unlock revenue at scale.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
detourdog 2y ago
The hard part to pull off with this strategy is that a truly wide spread "robot" platform I think depends on the commodification of the IP driving the platform. I think there are many early innovators that fail in later stage growth because of this issue.

nthingtohide 2y ago

I think Nvidia should try to create an compute-analogue of wifi routers where computation will be offloaded to smart-home gpu-servers. This strategy will cement their future for eternity.

dartos 2y ago
Why sell to consumers when you can sell to large corporations at 10x the price?
- talldayo 2y ago
  Because consumers will pay ~3-5x MSRP if the hype is big enough.
  - jszymborski 2y ago
    Corps aren't impervious to hype either.
david-gpu 2y ago
Something in that spirit is already making progress: compute attached to cell phone towers, called "edge computing". Because you are pooling computer resources across many more users you have better amortized cost than if you had a workstation on every home that was idle 99% of the time. Of course, latency and bandwidth to the cell tower is worse than wifi, but better than if the compute is done on a remote server. I have no idea of which model will succeed for which use cases, but the idea is sound.
- giancarlostoro 2y ago
  Not sure how well this would scale if every users needing to compute all at once. Which all it takes is some meme new app that requires heavy computation and then everyone downloads it.
  - david-gpu 2y ago
    It has the same scalability issues and the same scalability solutions as cell towers themselves, doesn't it? Densely populated areas have more cell towers and thus smaller cells. Again: which computation paradigm works best depends on the use case. It is not an all or nothing situation.
- nthingtohide 2y ago
  Smart mirror, smart appliances, smart robots (of various kinds), all could benefit from such a central compute server which can work without internet. All appliances will have voice interface, and will require heavy intelligence so it is better if the model is downloaded to a central place at home. This model also means all home appliances can be equally smart with no restriction on form factor of the appliances themselves. Nvidia could model itself around current mobile companies selling OS, models, everything in a nice compute-rack package.
Teever 2y ago
I think there's a definite itch to scratch with this kind of stuff and you can see hobbyists already tinkering on the edges with things like home assistant and the homelabs community. As much as there are market drivers to make the cloud attractive to businesses and legitimate reasons why cloud solutions are better than alternatives there is a real desire in a growing number of people to have a solution that they can tinker with but that also has a polished UI so they don't have to tinker with it when they don't want to.
penjelly 2y ago
funny I landed on this idea myself but ended up thinking it had no value

amelius 2y ago

> they don't want to be simply compute providers I'm still surprised they did not create an App Store for AI. Basically lock everything down and make developers pay a % of their revenue, Apple style.

alephnerd 2y ago
> Basically lock everything down and make developers pay a % of their revenue, Apple style At enterprise scale, locked down marketplaces don't work. They act as an forcing factor for larger organizations to build in house because no one wants vendor lock-in or to lose money via an arbitrage. This is a major reason why you'll see large deals pushing for enhanced customization options or API parity, as larger customers have the ability to push back against vendor lock-in. Furthermore, a relatively open market (eg. NGC) acts as a loss-leader by allowing a community to develop using a corporate standard, thus allowing you to build stickiness without directly impacting a customer's bottom-line Fundamentally, a company driven by Enterprise revenue (eg. Nvidia) will have a different marketplace structure from a B2C product such as Apple's App Store where purchasers have little power.
- amelius 2y ago
  > At enterprise scale, locked down marketplaces don't work. If this was true, we'd have more mobile computing platforms. Large enterprises publish in Apple's AppStore.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    > Large enterprises publish in Apple's AppStore. Purchasers from Apple's App Store are primarily individual consumers. It is a B2C play. Monetizing an Nvidia marketplace such as NGC would be foolhardy as the primary users/"purchasers" are organizations with budgets and procurement power. It is an Enterprise B2B player. In enterprise sales, the power differential between (mid- and upper-market) customers and vendors is in the customer's favor, as they have significant buying power and thus a higher user acquisition cost. The upside is revenue is much higher, margins are better, and you can differentiate on product as commodification is difficult. This is less so in consumer facing sales as customers have significantly weaker buying power, but conversely have a much lower user acquisition cost at scale. Hence, a growth-based GTM approach is critical, as you need customers in aggregate to truly unlock revenue at scale.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

detourdog 2y ago

The hard part to pull off with this strategy is that a truly wide spread "robot" platform I think depends on the commodification of the IP driving the platform. I think there are many early innovators that fail in later stage growth because of this issue.