alt Hacker NewsChina already operates like this. Low cost specialized models are the name of the game. Cheaper to train, easy to deploy.
The US has a problem of too much money leading to wasteful spending.
If we go back to the 80s/90s, remember OS/2 vs Windows. OS/2 had more resources, more money behind it, more developers, and they built a bigger system that took more resources to run.
Mac vs Lisa. Mac team had constraints, Lisa team didn't.
Unlimited budgets are dangerous.
Replies
On the Mac vs Lisa team, I generally agree but wasn't there a strong tension on budget vs revenue on Mac vs Apple II? And that Apple II had even more constrained budget per machine sold which led to the conflict between Mac and Apple II teams. (Apple II team: "We bring in all the revenue+profit, we offer color monitors, we serve businesses and schools at scale. Meanwhile, Steve's Mac pirate ship is a money pit that also mocks us as the boring Navy establishment when we are all one company!")
By the logic of constraints (on a unit basis), Apple II should have continued to dominate Mac sales through the early 90s but the opposite happened.
Perhaps its because american hyperscalers want unlimited upside for their capital?
> Low cost specialized models
Can you elaborate on this? Is this something that companies would train themselves?
It has been a very bad bet that hardware will not evolve to exceed the performance requirements of today's software tomorrow, just as it is a bad bet that tomorrow someone will rewrite today's software to be slower.
Though I do agree with you, I just came back from a trip to China (Shanghai more specifically) and while attending a couple AI events, the overwhelming majority of people there were using VPNs to access Claude code and codex :-/