[lich_king]

Because most of these things are not multi-trillion-dollar ideas. "We found a way to make illustrators, copyeditors, and paralegals, and several dozen other professions, somewhat obsolete" in no way justifies the valuations of OpenAI or Nvidia.

[IAmGraydon]

>Because most of these things are not multi-trillion-dollar ideas.

That's right, but there's more. When you think about the cost of compute and power for these LLM companies, they have no choice. It MUST be a multi-trillion-dollar idea or it's completely uninvestable. That's the only way they can sucker more and more money into this scheme.

[jazz9k]

Perhaps not. But I find myself using LLMs instead ofba search engine like Google.

This does have value.

[IAmGraydon]

To you, yes, but the compute to return that search costs them far more than a simple search query and on top of that it's hard to monetize.

[faangguyindia]

It doesn't, most of research is cached and most of the inference which is returned is also cached unless you are always asking unique things

[IAmGraydon]

This is literally the first time I've heard this. What is your source? I can type the exact same query three times and though the general meaning may be the same, the actual output is unique every single time. How do you explain this if it's cached?

[reverius42]

I don't know about OpenAI, but Nvidia's valuation seems more justifiable based on their actually known revenue and profit, and because it's publicly traded.

Though if the bubble(?) bursts and Nvidia starts selling fewer units year-over-year, that could be problematic.