> I had assumed it would be evidence that inference/Codex is fundamentally unprofitable (as Ed often blogs about) Ed's claim is that they haven't shown inferen

> I had assumed it would be evidence that inference/Codex is fundamentally unprofitable (as Ed often blogs about) Ed's claim is that they haven't shown inference to be profitable. Which is true? And that he personally believe it is unprofitable (his personal opinion, not what his data report). I think that's a meaningful distinction with your statement