It might be a huge pile of cards but this time they have the coffers for it, if/when it falls it will be from one of the fake it till you make it companies like openai that are built on promises (and frankly their revenue numbers are no where near their promised spend so they seem dependant on more and more deals)
The team also assumes LLM companies will capture 2 per cent of the digital advertising market in revenue, from slightly more than zero currently.
I'd like to think that OpenAI's digital ad revenue should reach 10% by 2030 an then accelerate from there. In my opinion, the data that ChatGPT has on a user is better than the inferred user data from Instagram/FB usage. I think ChatGPT can build a better advertisement profile of each user than Meta can which can lead to better ad targeting.
This doesn't account for OpenAI's other ambitions such as Sora app.
Hey Sam Altman or OpenAI employee, if you are reading this, I think you should buy the North American version of TikTok if the opportunity presents itself. The future of short videos will be heavily AI generated/assisted. Combine Tiktok's audience with your Sora tools and ChatGPT data and you got yourself a true Instagram competitor immediately. If the $14b sales price of US Tiktok is real, that's an absolute bargain in the grand scheme of things.
Also, it reminded me of the following quote, mentioned in the book, from Langdon Winner
The changes and disruptions that an evolving technology repeatedly caused in modern life were accepted as given or inevitable simply because no one bothered to ask whether there were other possibilities.
Unfounded statements (outside of language tasks, fwiw), such as: >LLM subscriptions will become “as ubiquitous and useful as Microsoft 365”, HSBC says.
As well as this bold claim about OAI's potential to double the conversion rate: >It models that by 2030, 10 per cent of OpenAI users will be paying customers, versus an estimated 5 per cent currently.
Does not include a major player in its market share analysis at all: >Google is excluded entirely
And, still, it suggests that: > OpenAI is expected to still be subsidising its users well into next decade
Fascinating.
Isn't that super cheap? Just think of the revolutionary impact it would have on education, health, work etc.
I don't understand how anyone can call it a bubble.
One could argue that LLMs will change the world, but that doesn't guarantee that LLM companies will capture any of that value.
The additional rub is that the paying power users are arguably costing these companies more money than the free users.
Perhaps because in this scenario, even after (only) an additional $40bn a year for the next 5 years, OpenAI will still be losing money.
cebert•2mo ago