logoalt Hacker News

skerit • yesterday at 8:25 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

I just don't really understand the entire strategy behind this. Or their horrible, horrible communication.

Because right now it's as if Fable/Mythos 5 is "the end of the line". It's as if this is the best their models are ever going to be. So what the hell are we going to get next? All of their models will forever inch closer to Fable, but never reach it? That doesn't make any sense.

It all seems so dramatic. Instead of just saying honestly "Look, this model is a beast to run, but we're striving to reach the same quality in a cheaper model down the line" all we get is "Oh my god, it's so big and scary, and it costs so much to run, woe is me!"

Replies

themgt • today at 1:12 AM

afaik there's somewhat painful economics. Not sure back-of-napkin but something like:

   • 150-500B: Sonnet
   • 0.9-2T: Opus
   • 3-5T/10T: Fable / Mythos
So if bigger model is "smarter" but you effectively wind up with a "shared hosting" model where a coherent inherence node(s) that cost $2m or something can run max 10x customer workloads simultaneously ... not sure what that can be priced at.

If it turns out a $10m/10x shared node can host even smarter models, then what?

➕ show 1 reply