those companies arent profitable either and they have same problems in which it costs them more to run their products than they are currently charging people to use it.
Did you read the title? It says to spend Walmart and Amazon’s money on AI. And you said “those companies aren’t profitable either” which would mean, using normal rules of English grammar, that “Walmart and Amazon aren’t profitable and OpenAI and Anthropic aren’t profitable either”. So what are you talking about? What does “either” mean?
More companies with less money is better than a few companies with all the money.
Ultimately distributed power has to be more democratic, and centralized power has to be more fascistic.
That’s part of why governments having large distributed bureaucracies each with their own authority and independent ability to intervene is better than say; a single executive office/president controlling everything directly.
Distribution also leads to stability though (making it harder to challenge the status quo), so it’s a double edged sword.
Thus transferring their money to openAI, Anthropic etc? How does that help?
They actually lose money as well, because they’re proving those tokens at below cost price.
It’s all going to Nvidia
those companies arent profitable either and they have same problems in which it costs them more to run their products than they are currently charging people to use it.
What do you mean by either? Walmart and Amazon make tens of billions in profit a year if not a quarter.
i thought we were talking about OpenAI, antrhropic, etc, not Walmart?
Did you read the title? It says to spend Walmart and Amazon’s money on AI. And you said “those companies aren’t profitable either” which would mean, using normal rules of English grammar, that “Walmart and Amazon aren’t profitable and OpenAI and Anthropic aren’t profitable either”. So what are you talking about? What does “either” mean?
ooh I see. my bad. erase the word either from my comment, it wasn’t necessary.
More companies with less money is better than a few companies with all the money.
Ultimately distributed power has to be more democratic, and centralized power has to be more fascistic.
That’s part of why governments having large distributed bureaucracies each with their own authority and independent ability to intervene is better than say; a single executive office/president controlling everything directly.
Distribution also leads to stability though (making it harder to challenge the status quo), so it’s a double edged sword.