this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
1169 points (98.5% liked)

Funny

16300 readers
521 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Tech companies are expected to be run at a loss for quite some time before they start being profitable.

They were founded in 2015 and "officially" launched GPT in 2022 to the public. If they make profits by 2032, that would be in line with how other tech companies established themselves.

For example, Spotify wasn't profitable until 2024. They launched in 2008.

So, I don't know why them not being profitable is what everyone is talking about. They're not expected to be profitable until 2030 at the earliest. And every serious investor know this.

Yes I'm very fun at parties. But it seems that a lot of people just do not understand the expected timelines of tech companies.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 19 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Okay but the world had enough money to bankroll Spotify for 20 years. It doesn't have the kind of money OpenAI needs.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

And Spotify was barely making a loss AND had a lot of revenue. They were just putting more capital into infrastructure, etc. instead of profits.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

Excuse me? From 2017 to 2022. Spotify lost an average of ~430 million euro per year. And they weren't profitable from 2008 to 2016 either... -0.43 billion per year is not "barely making a loss". But investors saw potential and they kept funding.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

When it comes to technology that nations consider existential to their existence. There is always enough money.

[–] uen3@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They have to at least have a plausible path to profitability. The serious investors have known for some time there isn't one with AI. Just because the AI companies will never be profitable long term doesn't mean there is no reason to invest in them short term. That's what a speculative bubble is. Everyone believes the line will keep going up long enough for them to turn around and sell to a greater fool in the near future. And for the most part they're right. The ultimate bag-holder ends up being the middle class worker and their auto-assigned 401k portfolio.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago

They have multiple plausible paths to profitability. To claims there's none is just stupid. If they succeed or not is another question. But it's absolutely plausible.

The product and profitability towards the average citizen of the world, is such a microscopic part of their goals. People using their product is nothing more than data to feed their model. When they're done. Their profits are not going to come from people. It's going to come from the US government and companies. The investments being poured into OpenAI isn't just disappearing into a black hole, lots of it remains in the hardware and digital infrastructure required for the project.

Even if their public worth drops to 0. They will still keep being funded. Because the research is too important to let go of.

[–] affenlehrer@feddit.org 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

I like LLMs and also the research but I think we're at a point where one could make a pause, turn the models into silicon and sell them as hardware for people who are actually interested.

That would solve all privacy problems, eliminate many data centers, subscription fees, internet dependencies and allow for slower and more thoughtful upgrades (hardware isn't updated as often as software). That would be a pretty sovereign solution.

However, from a company perspective they can't force it on everyone anymore, don't get all the juicy data from all the users and can't sell subscriptions any more and change everything on their side.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 7 points 6 days ago (5 children)

turn the models into silicone

The models are data, and silicone is rubber. So... I don't know what you're proposing here.

[–] cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I believe he is suggesting we turn them into very large breasts, or in some cases big booties, depending on your preference and what part of the world you're in.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 3 points 6 days ago (13 children)

Might mean "silicon", but might want to bang the LLM. Hard to know.

Words have meaning...

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ExtraJudgement@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Proprietary frontier LLMs in companies riddled with highly suspect business practices.

My local LLM setup has absolutely been making the equivalence of positive cashflow for me since gemma 4 and qwen 3.8: I need less total time for several groups of annoying (but necessary) tasks, which means my productivity is up and I can use the rest as my own free time.

[–] late_pessimistic@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I need less total time for several groups of annoying (but necessary) tasks

Such as? Just curious what people use LLMs for.

[–] ExtraJudgement@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)
  • Answer questions (with references) about source code and documentation
  • Add clear-bounded features to a pre-existing codebase
  • Transpile between programming languages

Stuff I can do myself perfectly well, but the results - after postprocessing - are indistinguishable from me having done so. Even when accounting for everything (including hallucinations) the time savings are real: Renewables-powered electricity is cheaper than my attention. By a lot.

Caveat: This only works if you're already a domain expert and if you do it exclusively for too long, you might be at risk of ceasing to be such an expert. Don't use it to try and do the thinking for you.

[–] antiR@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I handle so many text files in my job and LLMs help make the scripts for me to handle these text files. I know it is important to at least know stuff like regex but I am not a superhuman. It is difficult for me to heavily specialize in scripting while also specialize in the technicalities of my job. To help show why it is difficult to specialize scripting, I work with hardware description languages which have a different syntax from scripting languages. Handling different languages causes confusion on the proper syntax even with a basic if else statement because the syntax is different between languages.

Aside from this, it can also help me automate describing what the sequences I created in the file for easy documentation. I just have to instruct the "patterns" it needs to look for. I just need to proofread the output and do minor fixes.

[–] BilSabab@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

at this rate Winamp might get more profitable than OpenAI and it is free.

[–] Jumi@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But isn't OpenAI just burning billions of moneys already? In that case Winamp is already more profitable

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] m532@lemmy.ml 9 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Capitalists: Noo its bad, see, it doesn't make profit

Communists: Free AI for everyone

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 6 days ago (5 children)

They'll reclassify it as a necessary utility like water or power and tax more subsidies for paying billionaires even more from public coffers before admitting it's mostly just search engines & corporate social media eating their own tail.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Waiter, please bring me 1,000 of your finest shares of WinRAR! I'm going to be rich, I tell you! Quite!

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 5 days ago

they are very adept at doing a negative cash flow.

load more comments
view more: next ›