11 ms·

Anthropic raising funding valuing it at $60B

115 points by jmsflknr 2y ago

airstrike 2y ago
OT: FWIW I think "Anthropic in Advanced Talks to Raise $2B, Valuing It at $60B" makes for a better headline and is basically a shorter version of the first line of the article. It's a pretty factual edit so I don't think it qualifies as editorializing.
onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
Non-paywall link: https://archive.is/ucguC https://archive.is/ucguC
minimaxir 2y ago
I'm far, far more bullish on Anthropic than OpenAI at this point. It has relatively less hype and media attention but better products downstream, which in the end is what's going to be the winner in this LLM ecosystem.
- yieldcrv 2y ago
  and a standard operating structure, no issues with dealing with it. just a classic case study on why not to do anything other than a Delaware C-Corporation and share grants
  - monitorlizard 2y ago
    I believe Anthropic is a PBC not a C-Corp
- aerhardt 2y ago
  People surely love Anthropic around these parts and on Reddit, but as a paying customer of both Claude and ChatGPT, I'll take the latter any time of day. I trust o1 much more than Sonnet, and I really like the ChatGPT native Mac client. I hope you guys are right though because the last thing we need is a quasi-monopoly in OpenAI.
- singularity2001 2y ago
  > better products downstream except for the standalone app which is half as usable as OpenAI's
optimalsolver 2y ago
Considering how fast open source models are closing the performance gap, this is rather optimistic. Maybe if they somehow fixed hallucinations and kept the secret sauce to themselves, I could see them being worth that much, but all the top labs seem to have given up on that problem.
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
  This doesn't seem relevant. Anthropic could pivot to a UI and hosting for models (potentially with some or no proprietary models) and still be worth $60B.
datadrivenangel 2y ago
"The startup’s annualized revenue—an extrapolation of the next 12 months’ revenue based on recent sales—recently hit about $875 million, one of the knowledgeable people said. Most of that has come from sales to businesses." Anthropic's team plans are actually pretty pleasant to use. It does seem strange/funny though, that a significant part of the evaluation choice from a business perspective is that Anthropic is more trustworthy than OpenAI.
highfrequency 2y ago
Private market valuations are funky and hard to reason about. In the public markets, valuation represents the current equilibrium of supply and demand - very roughly an average of a large number of opinions. In private markets, especially with the recent trend of selling a tiny portion of the company at a massive price, the valuation represents something much closer to the maximum that any investor in the world thinks the company is valued at.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ramraj07 2y ago
  Given the current valuation of Tesla, it doesn't look very different from private market valuations. If anything private valuations seem more sane than the public market to me.
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
  Especially when BARTERING a tiny portion of the company for resources from another company - that massively benefits a growth area. Amazon can "buy" $2B worth of Anthropic to guarantee $2B of spending on AWS - to report that as growth under AWS in their earnings - to juice their stock price. They also get to report that their investment in the previous round is up massively.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > the valuation represents something much closer to the maximum that any investor in the world thinks the company is valued at This is all before accounting for the preference stack, which makes multiplying a Series F per-share price (itself derived from dividing compute time by some magic number) by employee common stock a bit silly.
  - boulos 2y ago
    I doubt their preferences are >1x since they've always had high demand. In that case, the preference stack would just be the total raised over time (~$10B).
bnchrch 2y ago
Theres two futures I see. 1. We create near AGI 2. We create ASI (Artificial Super Intelligence) In the first scenario, an investment in any AI model company that does not own its own compute is like buying a tar pit instead of an oil well. In other words, this future has AI like a commodity and the entity who wins is the one who can produce it at the lowest cost. In the second scenario, an investment in any AI model company is like buying a lottery ticket. If that company is the first to create ASI then you've won the game as we know it. I think the minor possibility of the second scenario makes this a good investment. But it definitely feels like all or nothing instead of sustainable business.
- optimalsolver 2y ago
  I guess I should expect it on a VC-tied forum, but it seems strange to talk about company valuations and investment outlooks in the event of an artificial superintelligence operating in the world.
  - personjerry 2y ago
    Reminds me of Vault-Tec from the Fallout universe trying to "win the capitalism game" and "optimize shareholder value" after a nuclear apocalypse, going so far as to facilitate nuclear war in order to raise their value as a "defense company"
  - norir 2y ago
    Your comment raised a question for me: what makes you certain that there isn't already an artificial superintelligence operating in the world? I am not sure that it is possible to know when the threshold has been crossed.
    - Jerrrry 2y ago
      I would suggest being careful treading that thought experiment.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    If we invented ASI today, it'd still take a lot of economic digestion time, especially on the physical side. ASI doesn't mean it can magically reverse-infer a digital process from an existing hodge-podge of automation and manual steps. ASI doesn't mean there are instantly enough telerobotics or sensors to physically automate all processes. Similarly, even ASI will by definition be non-deterministic and make mistakes. So processes will have to be reengineered to be compatible with it.
awongh 2y ago
Crazy that Anthropic has a fraction of the AI model market that OpenAI has, but a valuation that's larger than their proportional share of the market to OpenAI.... The last valuation was at $157 billion- Anthropic is valued at 1/3 of OpenAI but has 1/10th of the market share....
- henry-j 2y ago
  Great point — I see this as evidence that this investment is more "who gets AGI first" speculation than "who has more chat subscriptions".
  - awongh 2y ago
    Afaik this isn't just chat website user base, this also includes API calls through different platforms- Amazon, Azure, etc.
- HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
  But their API usage market shares are much more comparable. Where OpenAI have a huge lead is in chatbot subscriptions (ChatGPT vs Claude). At the end of the day it seems that API usage - business use - is where the potential huge usage is. Also, Anthropic's Sonnet 3.5 seems to be widely preferred as a developer tool, even over OpenAI's newer GPT-o1, and developer use is one of the current leading use cases for AI.
  - awongh 2y ago
    I found this: https://www.tanayj.com/p/openai-and-anthropic-revenue-breakdown https://www.tanayj.com/p/openai-and-anthropic-revenue-breakd... Which says Anthropic is about 1/2 the API revenue of OpenAI and growing fast. But OpenAI is actually 5x revenue overall and 18x the chat product revenue. (This is from Oct, not sure how much would have changed).
- nbardy 2y ago
  The market is betting the best model wins to some extent and anthropic is not slowing down.
varelse 2y ago
[dead]
eGQjxkKF6fif 2y ago
Meanwhile I use the AI on one of my projects and it cuts me off making me wait 3 hours. I get it, but for $60Billion I think they can afford some IO.
- stuckkeys 2y ago
  That is paper money, not pipeline decongestion. I was going to suggest API but then I remember there is a limit to that also. Bastadz.
erulabs 2y ago
I really love Anthropic, I'm building a business around it, and chat with Claude almost every time I go out for a beer after a long day... But having a valuation equal to _Stripe_ seems a bit insane. Either they've got some secret sauce or AI hype is a bit much or Stripe is undervalued. Especially considering I pay for Claude, the beer, and my business _thru Stripe_!
- bbor 2y ago
  TBF Stripe is a (effective!) middleman for (very common!) transactions, whereas Anthropic is selling a service with the potential to replace full time employees. It takes a lot of transaction margins to add up to how much a corporation will pay to replace a department of 10 employees earning $100K down to one person... So in this context I don't think frequency of use is very illuminating! P.S. I'm so glad you're able to derive some joy from these new technologies, but I would also offer a soft suggestion to watch Season 3 of Westworld. It's probably not as good aesthetically as the previous two, but it's also pretty separated and deals throughout with the concept of AI therapists/friends, and how they might be a short-term comfort but a long-term threat to our individuality. Obviously a chat here and there with current LLMs is nowhere near that yet, but thought you might find it interesting!
- vallode 2y ago
  Do I understand correctly you chat wıth Claude as a form of social relief or are you talking about drinking beer and chatting with it about work/ideation etc. Either way, just curious! On topic though, I wholeheartedly agree that this valuation seems rather... unrealistic. I do think "hype" is how we currently handle a lot of valuations, for the worse in my opinion.
  - treebeard901 2y ago
    All models can hallucinate pretty well... Which ones are best at being an intoxicated friend?
- dingnuts 2y ago
  >and chat with Claude almost every time I go out for a beer after a long day... with all due respect, how can you take yourself seriously doing this? I tried to use an LLM as a "cheap therapist" exactly one time and it felt so phony I quit almost instantly, after about four messages. The bot pretends to feel compassion for you! How does that not induce rage? It does for me. False empathy is way worse than nothing. And on top of it, you're talking to a hosted LLM! I hope you are not divulging anything personal to the random third party you're sending your thoughts to.. This stuff is going to be such a huge boon to authoritarian governments.
deadbabe 2y ago
The best AI model will not win the AI wars, it will be the most cost effective model at scale that wins.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jedberg 2y ago
A lot of folks complaining about the valuation. It's important to remember that investing in an AI model company isn't the same as investing in most other businesses. You're not investing hoping that they turn into a big business with a nice return. You're investing because you assume the value will either be zero or infinity. If they achieve AGI first, then the valuation you invested in doesn't matter because the value will basically be infinite (or will completely change society in a way that money won't matter anymore). If someone else achieves AGI first, the value is basically zero. And if AGI isn't achieved, well, there probably won't be any exit. But if there is, it's a nice bonus if it still has any value.
- Jerrrry 2y ago
  What an exisistentally terse moment for late stage capitalism; betting State-sponsored shitcoins on our future quasi-cybernetic giga-corp overlords to offset increasingly miniscule differences in individual economic starvation.
  - gom_jabbar 2y ago
    I think late stage capitalism is an imprecise term - it does not capture the fundamental decoupling process - for what Nick Land has called "escape-phase capital autonomization" [0]. [0] https://retrochronic.com/#great-decoupling https://retrochronic.com/#great-decoupling
    - Jerrrry 2y ago
      Thank you, he has articulated some outcomes and signs I hadn't yet. His thesis that AI is just distilled omega-capitalism is true, very plainly.
CobrastanJorji 2y ago
This is a great example of creating value by making sure everybody's got a piece of the pie. Say you're some OpenAI employees. You know a lot about AI, you've got the resume, you've got some buzz, and you want your own successful startup. How do you make sure that it gets maximum preferential treatment and first dibs on all the data and GPU? By making sure the big dogs are all going to get super rich off of your success. So they got billions in investment from Google, even more billions in investments from Amazon, half a billion from FTX (whoops), then some VCs for additional shmoozing power, and you're good to go. It helps to have the technical chops and a good product to distinguish yourself, but at that point, Amazon and Google are both going to go out of their way to shove your AI into everything, so having something to contribute is practically just a nice bonus if you can manage it.
nojvek 2y ago
Lots of money at the top 1% looking for high risk high returns. The top 1% in US own 40% of wealth, and top 10% own 80% of it. We are beyond Pareto ratio of 20:80.
nsoolo 2y ago
In the last few months the quality of all Claude models has gone down a lot, I hope that in the future they plan to improve it.
- kridsdale3 2y ago
  There was a capacity crunch on the AWS nodes they rely on. I expect them to have a quality dial to pull back before overload. It would scale based on usage and server availablity.
- danielbln 2y ago
  Not for me, in fact the latest Sonnet iteration improved things considerably.
graycat 2y ago
Come on, guys, help me out here: Take some people, have them write essays, collect and process all the essays, which to me sounds like one step above high school plagiarism, and now expect to discover some "new, correct, significant" content none of those people knew? I've created some new ideas: Yes, maybe all I did was "read what other's had done and took the next step", but that step seemed novel to me and, thus, just NOT in the "essays" or "what other's had done". Uh, just how the novelty happened does not seem to be in any of the essays or "what other's had done"? Okay, maybe a two-step approach: (1) Make wild guesses. (2) Run experiments and test the guesses. But is current AI doing either of (1) and (2)? Right, for some board games can do both (1) and (2). Test the guesses with the content of the essays or "others have done"? Here's a simple example: At one point the FedEx BOD wanted some revenue projections, uh, seriously wanted as in else "pull the funding". People had hopes, wishes, but nothing that sounded objective. Soooo, I noticed, guessed (1) growth would be mostly from the happy existing customers (2) influencing customers to be. The influencing would be a customer to be receiving via FedEx a package from a happy customer. So what? Okay, for time t let y(t) be the revenue at time t. Let b be the total size of the market, i.e., the revenue when do have all the target customers. Then at time t, the growth rate would be proportional to both (a) the number of current current customers and, thus, proportional also to y(t) and (b) proportional to the number of customers to be, and, thus, to (b - y(t)). So for some constant of proportionality k, we have that the growth rate d/dt y(t) = y'(t) = k y(t) (b - y(t)) which has a simple closed form solution. Then for any k > 0, can do some arithmetic and find y(t) for any t > 0 and draw a graph. Do this and pick a k that yields a plausible, reasonable graph, and present that to the BOD. It worked, i.e., pleased the BOD which did not "pull the funding". This work was 100% mine. Lot's of people in the office worked on the problem, but none of then had any ideas as good as mine -- i.e., could have them all write the "essays", process those, and still not come up with the little differential equation, its closed form solution, or a reasonable k. It seems to me that the essays, what others have done as training data just does not have or have a path to work that is new, correct, significant. Uh, can we train the AI in how to guess and test (beyond board games), how to start with a BOD request and, a description of the why and how of business growth, some calculus and get an answer, take epicycles and come up with F = ma, Tesla's experiments, Stokes formula, and get Maxwell's equations, make a wild guess and propose the Michelson-Morley experiment, get E = mc^2, use the inverse and implicit function theorems, Riemann's work on manifolds, and get general relativity, solve Fermat's last theorem, make real progress on the Riemann hypothesis??? Uh, in short, we need a idea not in the training data? Soooo, need to train the AI to have ideas? Ideas are just using what's in the essays to make connections in a graph and then exploring the graph until get a path to an answer?? How do such training? Can process existing text yield such training data?
liwliwei888 2y ago
[dead]

115 points by jmsflknr 2y ago

OT: FWIW I think "Anthropic in Advanced Talks to Raise $2B, Valuing It at $60B" makes for a better headline and is basically a shorter version of the first line of the article. It's a pretty factual edit so I don't think it qualifies as editorializing.

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago

Non-paywall link: https://archive.is/ucguC https://archive.is/ucguC

minimaxir 2y ago

I'm far, far more bullish on Anthropic than OpenAI at this point. It has relatively less hype and media attention but better products downstream, which in the end is what's going to be the winner in this LLM ecosystem.

yieldcrv 2y ago
and a standard operating structure, no issues with dealing with it. just a classic case study on why not to do anything other than a Delaware C-Corporation and share grants
- monitorlizard 2y ago
  I believe Anthropic is a PBC not a C-Corp
aerhardt 2y ago
People surely love Anthropic around these parts and on Reddit, but as a paying customer of both Claude and ChatGPT, I'll take the latter any time of day. I trust o1 much more than Sonnet, and I really like the ChatGPT native Mac client. I hope you guys are right though because the last thing we need is a quasi-monopoly in OpenAI.
singularity2001 2y ago
> better products downstream except for the standalone app which is half as usable as OpenAI's

optimalsolver 2y ago

Considering how fast open source models are closing the performance gap, this is rather optimistic. Maybe if they somehow fixed hallucinations and kept the secret sauce to themselves, I could see them being worth that much, but all the top labs seem to have given up on that problem.

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
This doesn't seem relevant. Anthropic could pivot to a UI and hosting for models (potentially with some or no proprietary models) and still be worth $60B.

datadrivenangel 2y ago

"The startup’s annualized revenue—an extrapolation of the next 12 months’ revenue based on recent sales—recently hit about $875 million, one of the knowledgeable people said. Most of that has come from sales to businesses." Anthropic's team plans are actually pretty pleasant to use. It does seem strange/funny though, that a significant part of the evaluation choice from a business perspective is that Anthropic is more trustworthy than OpenAI.

highfrequency 2y ago

Private market valuations are funky and hard to reason about. In the public markets, valuation represents the current equilibrium of supply and demand - very roughly an average of a large number of opinions. In private markets, especially with the recent trend of selling a tiny portion of the company at a massive price, the valuation represents something much closer to the maximum that any investor in the world thinks the company is valued at.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ramraj07 2y ago
Given the current valuation of Tesla, it doesn't look very different from private market valuations. If anything private valuations seem more sane than the public market to me.
onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
Especially when BARTERING a tiny portion of the company for resources from another company - that massively benefits a growth area. Amazon can "buy" $2B worth of Anthropic to guarantee $2B of spending on AWS - to report that as growth under AWS in their earnings - to juice their stock price. They also get to report that their investment in the previous round is up massively.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> the valuation represents something much closer to the maximum that any investor in the world thinks the company is valued at This is all before accounting for the preference stack, which makes multiplying a Series F per-share price (itself derived from dividing compute time by some magic number) by employee common stock a bit silly.
- boulos 2y ago
  I doubt their preferences are >1x since they've always had high demand. In that case, the preference stack would just be the total raised over time (~$10B).

bnchrch 2y ago

Theres two futures I see. 1. We create near AGI 2. We create ASI (Artificial Super Intelligence) In the first scenario, an investment in any AI model company that does not own its own compute is like buying a tar pit instead of an oil well. In other words, this future has AI like a commodity and the entity who wins is the one who can produce it at the lowest cost. In the second scenario, an investment in any AI model company is like buying a lottery ticket. If that company is the first to create ASI then you've won the game as we know it. I think the minor possibility of the second scenario makes this a good investment. But it definitely feels like all or nothing instead of sustainable business.

optimalsolver 2y ago
I guess I should expect it on a VC-tied forum, but it seems strange to talk about company valuations and investment outlooks in the event of an artificial superintelligence operating in the world.
- personjerry 2y ago
  Reminds me of Vault-Tec from the Fallout universe trying to "win the capitalism game" and "optimize shareholder value" after a nuclear apocalypse, going so far as to facilitate nuclear war in order to raise their value as a "defense company"
- norir 2y ago
  Your comment raised a question for me: what makes you certain that there isn't already an artificial superintelligence operating in the world? I am not sure that it is possible to know when the threshold has been crossed.
  - Jerrrry 2y ago
    I would suggest being careful treading that thought experiment.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  If we invented ASI today, it'd still take a lot of economic digestion time, especially on the physical side. ASI doesn't mean it can magically reverse-infer a digital process from an existing hodge-podge of automation and manual steps. ASI doesn't mean there are instantly enough telerobotics or sensors to physically automate all processes. Similarly, even ASI will by definition be non-deterministic and make mistakes. So processes will have to be reengineered to be compatible with it.

awongh 2y ago

Crazy that Anthropic has a fraction of the AI model market that OpenAI has, but a valuation that's larger than their proportional share of the market to OpenAI.... The last valuation was at $157 billion- Anthropic is valued at 1/3 of OpenAI but has 1/10th of the market share....

henry-j 2y ago
Great point — I see this as evidence that this investment is more "who gets AGI first" speculation than "who has more chat subscriptions".
- awongh 2y ago
  Afaik this isn't just chat website user base, this also includes API calls through different platforms- Amazon, Azure, etc.
HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
But their API usage market shares are much more comparable. Where OpenAI have a huge lead is in chatbot subscriptions (ChatGPT vs Claude). At the end of the day it seems that API usage - business use - is where the potential huge usage is. Also, Anthropic's Sonnet 3.5 seems to be widely preferred as a developer tool, even over OpenAI's newer GPT-o1, and developer use is one of the current leading use cases for AI.
- awongh 2y ago
  I found this: https://www.tanayj.com/p/openai-and-anthropic-revenue-breakdown https://www.tanayj.com/p/openai-and-anthropic-revenue-breakd... Which says Anthropic is about 1/2 the API revenue of OpenAI and growing fast. But OpenAI is actually 5x revenue overall and 18x the chat product revenue. (This is from Oct, not sure how much would have changed).
nbardy 2y ago
The market is betting the best model wins to some extent and anthropic is not slowing down.

varelse 2y ago

[dead]

eGQjxkKF6fif 2y ago

Meanwhile I use the AI on one of my projects and it cuts me off making me wait 3 hours. I get it, but for $60Billion I think they can afford some IO.

stuckkeys 2y ago
That is paper money, not pipeline decongestion. I was going to suggest API but then I remember there is a limit to that also. Bastadz.

erulabs 2y ago

I really love Anthropic, I'm building a business around it, and chat with Claude almost every time I go out for a beer after a long day... But having a valuation equal to _Stripe_ seems a bit insane. Either they've got some secret sauce or AI hype is a bit much or Stripe is undervalued. Especially considering I pay for Claude, the beer, and my business _thru Stripe_!

bbor 2y ago
TBF Stripe is a (effective!) middleman for (very common!) transactions, whereas Anthropic is selling a service with the potential to replace full time employees. It takes a lot of transaction margins to add up to how much a corporation will pay to replace a department of 10 employees earning $100K down to one person... So in this context I don't think frequency of use is very illuminating! P.S. I'm so glad you're able to derive some joy from these new technologies, but I would also offer a soft suggestion to watch Season 3 of Westworld. It's probably not as good aesthetically as the previous two, but it's also pretty separated and deals throughout with the concept of AI therapists/friends, and how they might be a short-term comfort but a long-term threat to our individuality. Obviously a chat here and there with current LLMs is nowhere near that yet, but thought you might find it interesting!
vallode 2y ago
Do I understand correctly you chat wıth Claude as a form of social relief or are you talking about drinking beer and chatting with it about work/ideation etc. Either way, just curious! On topic though, I wholeheartedly agree that this valuation seems rather... unrealistic. I do think "hype" is how we currently handle a lot of valuations, for the worse in my opinion.
- treebeard901 2y ago
  All models can hallucinate pretty well... Which ones are best at being an intoxicated friend?
dingnuts 2y ago
>and chat with Claude almost every time I go out for a beer after a long day... with all due respect, how can you take yourself seriously doing this? I tried to use an LLM as a "cheap therapist" exactly one time and it felt so phony I quit almost instantly, after about four messages. The bot pretends to feel compassion for you! How does that not induce rage? It does for me. False empathy is way worse than nothing. And on top of it, you're talking to a hosted LLM! I hope you are not divulging anything personal to the random third party you're sending your thoughts to.. This stuff is going to be such a huge boon to authoritarian governments.

deadbabe 2y ago

The best AI model will not win the AI wars, it will be the most cost effective model at scale that wins.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

jedberg 2y ago

A lot of folks complaining about the valuation. It's important to remember that investing in an AI model company isn't the same as investing in most other businesses. You're not investing hoping that they turn into a big business with a nice return. You're investing because you assume the value will either be zero or infinity. If they achieve AGI first, then the valuation you invested in doesn't matter because the value will basically be infinite (or will completely change society in a way that money won't matter anymore). If someone else achieves AGI first, the value is basically zero. And if AGI isn't achieved, well, there probably won't be any exit. But if there is, it's a nice bonus if it still has any value.

Jerrrry 2y ago
What an exisistentally terse moment for late stage capitalism; betting State-sponsored shitcoins on our future quasi-cybernetic giga-corp overlords to offset increasingly miniscule differences in individual economic starvation.
- gom_jabbar 2y ago
  I think late stage capitalism is an imprecise term - it does not capture the fundamental decoupling process - for what Nick Land has called "escape-phase capital autonomization" [0]. [0] https://retrochronic.com/#great-decoupling https://retrochronic.com/#great-decoupling
  - Jerrrry 2y ago
    Thank you, he has articulated some outcomes and signs I hadn't yet. His thesis that AI is just distilled omega-capitalism is true, very plainly.

CobrastanJorji 2y ago

This is a great example of creating value by making sure everybody's got a piece of the pie. Say you're some OpenAI employees. You know a lot about AI, you've got the resume, you've got some buzz, and you want your own successful startup. How do you make sure that it gets maximum preferential treatment and first dibs on all the data and GPU? By making sure the big dogs are all going to get super rich off of your success. So they got billions in investment from Google, even more billions in investments from Amazon, half a billion from FTX (whoops), then some VCs for additional shmoozing power, and you're good to go. It helps to have the technical chops and a good product to distinguish yourself, but at that point, Amazon and Google are both going to go out of their way to shove your AI into everything, so having something to contribute is practically just a nice bonus if you can manage it.

nojvek 2y ago

Lots of money at the top 1% looking for high risk high returns. The top 1% in US own 40% of wealth, and top 10% own 80% of it. We are beyond Pareto ratio of 20:80.

nsoolo 2y ago

In the last few months the quality of all Claude models has gone down a lot, I hope that in the future they plan to improve it.

kridsdale3 2y ago
There was a capacity crunch on the AWS nodes they rely on. I expect them to have a quality dial to pull back before overload. It would scale based on usage and server availablity.
danielbln 2y ago
Not for me, in fact the latest Sonnet iteration improved things considerably.

graycat 2y ago

Come on, guys, help me out here: Take some people, have them write essays, collect and process all the essays, which to me sounds like one step above high school plagiarism, and now expect to discover some "new, correct, significant" content none of those people knew? I've created some new ideas: Yes, maybe all I did was "read what other's had done and took the next step", but that step seemed novel to me and, thus, just NOT in the "essays" or "what other's had done". Uh, just how the novelty happened does not seem to be in any of the essays or "what other's had done"? Okay, maybe a two-step approach: (1) Make wild guesses. (2) Run experiments and test the guesses. But is current AI doing either of (1) and (2)? Right, for some board games can do both (1) and (2). Test the guesses with the content of the essays or "others have done"? Here's a simple example: At one point the FedEx BOD wanted some revenue projections, uh, seriously wanted as in else "pull the funding". People had hopes, wishes, but nothing that sounded objective. Soooo, I noticed, guessed (1) growth would be mostly from the happy existing customers (2) influencing customers to be. The influencing would be a customer to be receiving via FedEx a package from a happy customer. So what? Okay, for time t let y(t) be the revenue at time t. Let b be the total size of the market, i.e., the revenue when do have all the target customers. Then at time t, the growth rate would be proportional to both (a) the number of current current customers and, thus, proportional also to y(t) and (b) proportional to the number of customers to be, and, thus, to (b - y(t)). So for some constant of proportionality k, we have that the growth rate d/dt y(t) = y'(t) = k y(t) (b - y(t)) which has a simple closed form solution. Then for any k > 0, can do some arithmetic and find y(t) for any t > 0 and draw a graph. Do this and pick a k that yields a plausible, reasonable graph, and present that to the BOD. It worked, i.e., pleased the BOD which did not "pull the funding". This work was 100% mine. Lot's of people in the office worked on the problem, but none of then had any ideas as good as mine -- i.e., could have them all write the "essays", process those, and still not come up with the little differential equation, its closed form solution, or a reasonable k. It seems to me that the essays, what others have done as training data just does not have or have a path to work that is new, correct, significant. Uh, can we train the AI in how to guess and test (beyond board games), how to start with a BOD request and, a description of the why and how of business growth, some calculus and get an answer, take epicycles and come up with F = ma, Tesla's experiments, Stokes formula, and get Maxwell's equations, make a wild guess and propose the Michelson-Morley experiment, get E = mc^2, use the inverse and implicit function theorems, Riemann's work on manifolds, and get general relativity, solve Fermat's last theorem, make real progress on the Riemann hypothesis??? Uh, in short, we need a idea not in the training data? Soooo, need to train the AI to have ideas? Ideas are just using what's in the essays to make connections in a graph and then exploring the graph until get a path to an answer?? How do such training? Can process existing text yield such training data?

liwliwei888 2y ago

[dead]