logoalt Hacker News

swalsh • today at 5:57 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

I disagree actually, I think zucks original llama thesis is proving more correct by the week. The rent market on intelligence never materialized, and will not materialize.

In software, we've all become accustomed to the idea that the way you make money is by building little blocks of intellectual capital, then charging rent on it. That made sense when developing intellectual capital was a rare and valuable skill/asset and the thing you build was a rare and valuable asset. But now both are not rare. You can still charge rent, but the market is highly competitive, so prices match that.

Durable rents will end up going to those who owns the scarce assets, zuck is building those as we speak.

Dropping open weights will build an ecosystem that makes his valuable assets more valuable.


Replies

drusepth • today at 6:27 PM

> Durable rents will end up going to those who owns the scarce assets, zuck is building those as we speak.

I'm following but maybe I'm a little dense here: what are the scarce assets that Meta is building in this analogy?

➕ show 3 replies