damn, Charlie really fell off

Sure, I agree with that, but even at home, if I want 8 potatoes for gratin it’s pretty worth it

Disagree, I’ve worked in plenty of commercial kitchens with them and am fine at using a knife.

I generally trust EEs to not put MCUs where they aren’t needed,

Marketing convinced the boss it needs AI, too bad engineers

if you want to cut something very consistently and not spend much time to do it you use a mandoline

deleted by creator

Yes that’s basically what I was saying, that in small places the options can be very limited. I don’t know about Denmark but where I have lived (France, Germany, Switzerland) and visited, without literally any bus at all is still somewhat uncommon.

I guess? Most American cities have extremely poor public transport. NY and Chicago are okay but in most of Europe any place with more than 50-100k people will at least have a tram system and regional trains, maybe even a metro. It’s just when you get down to places with only a few thousand or a few hundred people, then the bus to town might only come once in the morning and once at night or something like that.

Yeah, but they never really systematically subsidised fares as such, except for some one-off bonuses to attract divers and stuff like that, in the sense that they didn’t systematically pay drivers more than people were paying per ride. They subsidised it in the sense that the cut they took didn’t cover their development costs, servers, marketing, etc. But those costs don’t increase linearly per customer and they also plateau as the software stack matures, so there’s a path to just raising prices and getting to profit, and each additional customer brought them closer to profit even while the subsidies existed.

OpenAI and Anthropic are paying something like 10x the amount for inference as they get from subscriptions, let alone free usage and training costs. So each new customer is taking them further from being profitable. And if they jacked up the prices 10x, so that the basic subscriptions were a few hundred and the pro ones a few thousand a month, they would still be in the position that Uber was when they were doing the subsidies for their infrastructure. I think it’s fairly obvious that they wouldn’t be acquiring customers very quickly at those prices.

That’s got nothing to do with how expensive it is to serve models to customers which is what was being discussed.

Depends. In cities no. In rural areas or small villages, often yes.

The cost of inference has passed the cost of training quite a while ago and it’s by far the majority of expenses

I think they mean the company since they’re the most famous example of subsidising the product to gain market share and their name is invoked all the time in discussions of AI economics

We are still in the Uber-subsidized part of the relationship.

It’s not comparable, the costs for Uber are fixed development costs which decrease per customer with more customers. AI is strictly more expensive the more users there are since the cost is per use. The financial outlook for the industry is very bad, it will probably never be profitable except maybe in some extremely niche situations.

this looks like the entrance to an absolutely sick club tbh

You go to the doctor, they say you are suffering burnout and prescribe you working less, potentially also therapy, and you get sick leave for the time you can’t work. How long depends on what the doctor says, but potentially quite long. You can’t be fired during that time except after a very long time (i.e. that you should be on permanent disability benefit instead) and the company making all possible efforts at other suitable arrangements.