4 ms·

> they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. > that's all just hype and marketing and them wanting regulation to block their com

> they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. > that's all just hype and marketing and them wanting regulation to block their competition I don't see how these two opinions have to be mutually exclusive. Everyone knows that OpenAI and Anthropic cannot IPO in their current state or the economy's current state. It makes perfect sense that they would lobby for a global slowdown to hamstring China, regulation that defers to them as experts, oversight by their own "experts" and nationalization to backstop both of their protectionist needs. Even if you think they're doing it for benevolent reasons, you have to admit that regulatory remediation only consolidates AI power. We see extremely similar protectionist consolidation in FAANG from Google, Apple, Microsoft and Meta, all of whom receive political shielding for their "free speech" whenever another nation calls their product a monopoly, identifies a federal backdoor or boots them out of the market. Countries like Russia and China feel entirely justified for closing the door on American businesses and refusing to negotiate when they abuse good faith to promote an American hegemony.

senordevnyc 1mo ago
Everyone knows that OpenAI and Anthropic cannot IPO in their current state or the economy's current state. What? Everyone doesn't know that. I predict one or both of them will IPO before the end of 2026.
- bigyabai 1mo ago
  How would they achieve ROI? The current consensus is that neither are in black financially and both have a diminishing moat. The reason they haven't IPO'd yet seems to be that they can't assure investors that it's not a fad stock. With market share lost to China, a shrinking frontier and a money fire of GPUs burning in the background, something major has to change to convince investors to treat them like Tesla or Apple. I think both of them want the government to give them a subsidy of some sort to justify their economics.
  - senordevnyc 1mo ago
    Haha, I disagree with every single statement you made! Wild how we can see it so differently. I think the ROI these big labs are seeing is incredible, I think their moats are increasing, I think their reasons for not IPOing yet have nothing to do with it being a "fad stock", I don't think they've lost any market share to China, I don't think their frontier is shrinking, I don't think their investments in GPU is a money fire, I think investors will rain money down on them when they IPO, and I don't think they're seeking a subsidy from the government. I guess we'll see!
    - bigyabai 1mo ago
      Those are perfectly fine beliefs, but again - how will they achieve ROI? If their finances are "incredible" while they're both in the red, their mediocre quarters will be devastating for investors. They either have to find a new revenue stream (likely from the federal government) or reduce their spending significantly. IPOing under the current condition would be a treadmill that neither company can recover from, even if retail investors shower them with cash. However, I will push back on three of your beliefs. Objectively speaking, market share has been lost to China, the frontier is more competitive than it was 3 years ago, and the GPUs that OpenAI and Anthropic buy are almost never at MSRP. I get that you're bullish on American AI, but the writing is on the wall and economists generally aren't echoing your sentiment for a reason.

senordevnyc 1mo ago

Everyone knows that OpenAI and Anthropic cannot IPO in their current state or the economy's current state. What? Everyone doesn't know that. I predict one or both of them will IPO before the end of 2026.

bigyabai 1mo ago
How would they achieve ROI? The current consensus is that neither are in black financially and both have a diminishing moat. The reason they haven't IPO'd yet seems to be that they can't assure investors that it's not a fad stock. With market share lost to China, a shrinking frontier and a money fire of GPUs burning in the background, something major has to change to convince investors to treat them like Tesla or Apple. I think both of them want the government to give them a subsidy of some sort to justify their economics.
- senordevnyc 1mo ago
  Haha, I disagree with every single statement you made! Wild how we can see it so differently. I think the ROI these big labs are seeing is incredible, I think their moats are increasing, I think their reasons for not IPOing yet have nothing to do with it being a "fad stock", I don't think they've lost any market share to China, I don't think their frontier is shrinking, I don't think their investments in GPU is a money fire, I think investors will rain money down on them when they IPO, and I don't think they're seeking a subsidy from the government. I guess we'll see!
  - bigyabai 1mo ago
    Those are perfectly fine beliefs, but again - how will they achieve ROI? If their finances are "incredible" while they're both in the red, their mediocre quarters will be devastating for investors. They either have to find a new revenue stream (likely from the federal government) or reduce their spending significantly. IPOing under the current condition would be a treadmill that neither company can recover from, even if retail investors shower them with cash. However, I will push back on three of your beliefs. Objectively speaking, market share has been lost to China, the frontier is more competitive than it was 3 years ago, and the GPUs that OpenAI and Anthropic buy are almost never at MSRP. I get that you're bullish on American AI, but the writing is on the wall and economists generally aren't echoing your sentiment for a reason.