Thank you for real data. Please moderate the use of the word profitable talking to engineers! We get the same circle jerk over and over here. Profit implies a

Thank you for real data. Please moderate the use of the word profitable talking to engineers! We get the same circle jerk over and over here. Profit implies a GAAP accrual of some sort. On any accrual schedule tied to reality, the companies are profitable now - that is, inference margin on each given model has more than paid for capital costs of training and deploying those models. That the companies get to show a loss is a feature of cash-basis accounting: they made $100m net on that last model? Good news, We’re spending $1b on the next! Infinite tax losses! The companies will not be cashflow positive for years. Why does this persnickety difference matter? It matters to me because I care about the engineers here - and they seem collectively likely to either short every AI company IPOing, or just quietly ignore AI impact on their livelihood, or head off into a corner and go catatonic - all based on a worldview that “this is collective insanity and everything here is going to eventually go bankrupt” — none of those are good outcomes. Shorting might be, but it should be done judiciously, and understanding the financial factors at play. So, anyway, long plea over - but, allow me to plead: cashflow positive if you want to make the point you were making.