JCM9

13 ms·

211.
by JCM9 1y ago
Don’t disagree it’s what investors want. Point is just that we’re approaching a point from an economics standpoint where the credibility of the “it’s ok because we’re investing in R&D” argument is rapidly wearing thin. WeWork’s investor
212.
by JCM9 1y ago
Agree it’s not the fashionable thing. There’s a line from The Big Short of “This is Wall Street Dr Bury, if you offer us free money we’re going to take it.” These companies are behaving the same way. Folks are willing to throw endless money
213.
by JCM9 1y ago
Yep. Many / most aquihires are pretty ugly financially. While the headline sounds impressive (“X startup acquired for $250M”) the reality is that with preferred cap tables and terms most folks see nothing and investors are merely tryin
214.
by JCM9 1y ago
VCs were literally pitching to startups to take their money during the pandemic (there were several articles about that at the time). That nonsense will now come home to roost as companies that took money at those hyper-inflated valuations
215.
by JCM9 1y ago
With the heat turning up on AI companies to explain how they will land on a viable business model some of this is starting to look like WeWork’s “Community Adjusted EBITA” arguments of “hey if you ignore where we’re losing money, we’re not
216.
by JCM9 1y ago
1. Someone is still paying for that cost. 2. “Open source” is great but then it’s just a commodity. It would be very hard to build a sustainable business purely on the back of commoditized models. Adding a feature to an actual product that
217.
by JCM9 1y ago
Costs will go up to levels where people will no longer find this stuff as useful/interesting. It’s all fun and games until the subsides end. See the recent reactions to AWS pricing on Kiro where folks had a big WTF reaction on pricing
218.
by JCM9 1y ago
Unit economics needs to include the cost of the thing being sold, not just the direct cost of selling it. Unit economics is mostly a manufacturing concept and the only reason it looks OK here is because of not really factoring in the cost o
219.
by JCM9 1y ago
These articles (of which there are many) all make the same basic accounting mistakes. You have to include all the costs associated with the model, not just inference compute. This article is like saying an apartment complex isn’t “losing mo
220.
by JCM9 1y ago
Fewer than 3 people? That almost never makes sense. Right on Google to sort that out but I’d have a lot of questions for whatever leaders allowed such nonsense to develop on their watch in the first place. Also 35% is way too low if it’s re
221.
by JCM9 1y ago
We’re using big data to fuel our agentic AI on the blockchain to drive synergies with our machine learning powered NFT tokens to amplify network effects of social media backed personalized marketing campaigns.
222.
by JCM9 1y ago
It’s unclear from the article exactly what happened, but the general implication/allegation one takes away is that Walmart tech operations looks more like waste management contracting from the Sopranos.
223.
by JCM9 1y ago
“Agentic” seems the be some quick pivot buzzword that the AI grifters started pushing as soon as generic AI started to show cracks. “Hey this AI stuff looks a bit overhyped.” “AI? Oh that’s kids stuff, let me tell you about our agentic feat
224.
by JCM9 1y ago
Add to being confidently wrong is the super annoying way it corrects itself after disastrously screwing something up. AI: “I’ve deployed the API data into your app, following best practices and efficient code.” Me: “Nope thats totally wrong
225.
by JCM9 1y ago
FOMO on the way up to the peak is a powerful force. Now that we’re sliding down the other side FOMO turns into “WTF did we just spend all that money on again?”
226.
by JCM9 1y ago
We are entering the “Trough of disillusionment.” These hype cycles are very predictable. GPT-5 being panned as a disappointment after endless hype may go down as GenAI’s “jump the shark” moment. It’s all fun and games until the bean counter
227.
by JCM9 1y ago
Well they’re just trying to reduce headcount overall to get the expenses for AWS in better shape and work through some bloat. The “we’re doing layoffs because of AI” story wasn’t sticking though so looks like now they’re backtracking that s
228.
by JCM9 1y ago
So to summarize: My boss said we were gonna fire a bunch of people “because AI” as part of some fluff PR to pretend we were actually leaders in AI. We tried that a bit, it was a total mess and we have no clue what we’re doing, I’ve been sen
229.
by JCM9 1y ago
Some good stuff here. I wish AWS would just focus on these boring, but ultimately important, things that they’re good at instead of all the current distractions trying to play catch up on “AI.” AWS leadership missed the boat there big time,
230.
by JCM9 1y ago
Whenever companies release glowing fluff PR about their amazing financials they key word in there is “non-GAAP.” i.e. when we exclude a bunch of pesky costs and other expenses that are the reason we’re not doing so well, we’re actually doin
231.
by JCM9 1y ago
Looks like someone is thinking “hey let’s wave our hands in the air and talk about AI and someone will write us a cheque!” as a way to kick the can down the road that this far into it they’re still not selling a product that’s making money.
232.
by JCM9 1y ago
There’s no question we’re in a “GenAI” bubble, the only question is how big of a smoking crater in the ground is going to be created when this thing pops. The tech isn’t going away, and is cool/useful, but from a business standpoint th
233.
by JCM9 1y ago
You can almost see the business school case study developing. “Rather than focusing on core competencies leadership panicked and rushed a poorly guided focus on GenAI without the right leadership and technical talent. Shifting resources tow
234.
by JCM9 1y ago
There are some transferable assets but the challenge is the commoditization of everything that means others have easy access to “good enough” assets to build upon. There’s very little moat to build in this business and that’s making all th
235.
by JCM9 1y ago
Most of these “we’re profitable on inference” comments are glossing over the depreciation cost of developing the model, which is essentially a capital expense. Given the short lifespan of models it seems unlikely that fully loaded cost look
236.
by JCM9 1y ago
I agree. Although based on the last earnings call where folks were poking at why they’re behind it seems a sensitive spot for AWS leadership. They’re not used to lagging in a hot space, which seems to be driving the panicked disjointed stra
237.
by JCM9 1y ago
Likely both. AWS was often 70+% more expensive on GPUs for a while and remains typically the most expensive provider when put in competitive scenarios. Remember that for Microsoft, Google, and others cloud is their low margin fun side busin
238.
by JCM9 1y ago
AWS is so far behind on GenAI they’re just flailing at this point. Their infrastructure is a commodity at best and their networking performance woes continue. Bedrock was a great idea poorly executed. Performance there is also a big proble
239.
by JCM9 1y ago
This is great. Commercials brought back memories.
240.
by JCM9 1y ago
LinkedIn is useful to check someone’s career history. Beyond that it’s mostly a bunch of folks spending time on LinkedIn trying to impress people that aren’t spending their time on LinkedIn. Which ironically drives away the people folks see

More ›