logoalt Hacker News

adam_arthurtoday at 1:02 AM1 replyview on HN

Definitely

I am not suggesting these companies can't pivot or monetize elsewhere, but the return on developing a marginally better model in-house does not really justify the cost at this stage.

But to your point, developing research, drugs, security audits or any kind of services are all monetization of the application of the model, not the monetization of the development of new models.

Put more simply, say you develop the best LLM in the world, that's 15% better than peers on release at the cost of $5B. What is that same model/asset worth 1 year later when it performs at 85% of the latest LLM?

Already any 2023 and perhaps even 2024 vintage model is dead in the water and close to 0 value.

What is a best in class model built in 2025 going to be worth in 2026?

The asset is effectively 100% depreciated within a single year.

(Though I'm open to the idea that the results from past training runs can be reused for future models. This would certainly change the math)


Replies

wyretoday at 3:22 AM

For sure, all these companies are racing to have the strongest model, and as time goes on we quickly start reaching diminishing returns. DeepSeek came out at the beginning of this year, blew everyone's minds, and now look at how far the industry has progressed beyond it.

It doesn't even seem like these companies are in a battle of attrition to not be the first to go bankrupt. Watching this would be a lot more exciting if that was the case! I think if there was less competition between LLMs developers could slow down, maybe.

Looking at the prices of inference of open-source models, I would bet proprietary models are making a nice margin on API fees, but there is no way OpenAI will make their investors whole because they make a few dollars of revenue for a million tokens. I am terrified of the world we will live in if OpenAI will be able to reverse their balance sheet. I think there's no where else that investors want to put their money.