8 ms·
No, of course the training costs aren't that high. Apple's ten years of future free cash flow is greater than a trillion dollars (they are above $100b per year)
by turtlesdown11 9mo ago
No, of course the training costs aren't that high. Apple's ten years of future free cash flow is greater than a trillion dollars (they are above $100b per year). Obviously, the training costs are a trivial amount compared to that figure.
- bombcar 9mo agoI have no idea what AI involves, but "training" sounds like a one-and-done - but how is the result "stored"? If you have trained up a Gemini, can you "clone" it and if so, what is needed? I was under the impression that all these GPUs and such were needed to run the AI, not only ingest the data.
- esafak 9mo agoYes, serving requires infra, too. But you can use infra optimized for serving; nvidia GPUs are not the only game in town.
- tefkah 9mo agoTheoretically it would be much less expensive to just continue to run the existing models, but ofc none of the current leaders are going to stop training new ones any time soon.
- bombcar 9mo agoSo are we on a hockey stick right now where a new model is so much better than the previous that you have to keep training? Because almost every example of previous cases of things like this eventually leveled out.
- DougBTX 9mo ago> but how is the result "stored" Like this: https://huggingface.co/docs/safetensors/index https://huggingface.co/docs/safetensors/index
- amelius 9mo agoHiring the right people should also be trivial with that amount of cash.
- ufmace 9mo agoWhat I'm wondering - their future cash flow may be massive compared to any conceivable rational task, but the market for servers and datacenters seems to be pretty saturated right now. Maybe, for all their available capital, they just can't get sufficient compute and storage on a reasonable schedule.