The tech blowout had little to do with Anthropic's filing.
The numbers from multiple companies show a high CapEx investment in a product that has yet to be proven as profitable as the very things it is hurting (i.e. ads). End of story.
Anthropic didn't lose $80B. Some complex securities tied to their stock went up in value by $72B, which they have to count as a loss, even though it's not cash out the door.
As far as Google's mark to market profit on Anthropic shares, everyone realizes that's not a sustainable source of income. Which is probably one reason why it's trading at about 15 times profits. If you back out the $99B of (unrealized) equity gains in anthropic and others, Google is trading at 25 times the last 12m earnings.
People should really look at cash flow statements instead of just earnings. Anthropic published one and their cash flow was positive for the first half of this year.
That doesn't mean all the circular financing won't be a problem, but people keep drawing the wrong conclusions from the negative earnings, which are relevant to investors but not so much to the viability of the business.
What I don't understand about the circular financing is how does it not violate antitrust? All these supposed rivals own huge stakes in each other. Are they really competitors?
"The shift in politics is even starker. In the 2010s and early 2020s, big tech was well-liked by most people. But AI is absolutely loathed by the public. These companies have never faced real public dissatisfaction, they all imagine themselves to be the good guys, with the credibility of having created magical search engines and smartphones. But that era is gone. They are now akin to the bankers on Wall Street in 2008, and politicians are winning elections by saying they hate AI as much as the voters do."
Yeah I see this too. That we're not innovating any more also doesn't help make our industry look good
I'm in agreement with the general point but was big tech well liked in the early 2020s?
Facebook scandals had exploded already, Google had already long abandoned "don't be evil", nobody ever liked Microsoft, and I think sentiment towards Apple is somewhat unchanged.
Tech at least in my eyes peaked around 2018-19. That also coincided with the first more mainstream public-aware introduction of vision and NLP systems into tech products. A few years later it all went downhill for the tech companies.
You can't claim that the tech industry isn't innovating. You can say that innovation effort has shifted away from many things that still need it. The issue I have is that the companies and products are so large and complex that they are extremely difficult to compete with.
The tech blowout had little to do with Anthropic's filing.
The numbers from multiple companies show a high CapEx investment in a product that has yet to be proven as profitable as the very things it is hurting (i.e. ads). End of story.
Anthropic didn't lose $80B. Some complex securities tied to their stock went up in value by $72B, which they have to count as a loss, even though it's not cash out the door.
As far as Google's mark to market profit on Anthropic shares, everyone realizes that's not a sustainable source of income. Which is probably one reason why it's trading at about 15 times profits. If you back out the $99B of (unrealized) equity gains in anthropic and others, Google is trading at 25 times the last 12m earnings.
People should really look at cash flow statements instead of just earnings. Anthropic published one and their cash flow was positive for the first half of this year.
That doesn't mean all the circular financing won't be a problem, but people keep drawing the wrong conclusions from the negative earnings, which are relevant to investors but not so much to the viability of the business.
What I don't understand about the circular financing is how does it not violate antitrust? All these supposed rivals own huge stakes in each other. Are they really competitors?
The entire economy relies on circular flows. That’s why we look at something called “net profit”.
Well rules stopped mattering to BigCo many hears ago
Boy, people sure do love turning data points into stories.
If they're referring to the recent tumble, I wouldn't suggest anthropic incited that
coreweave did
i'm sure ant didn't help, but thanks for the fire sale i guess
did he even renormalize the dataset on the S-1 fill size?
"The shift in politics is even starker. In the 2010s and early 2020s, big tech was well-liked by most people. But AI is absolutely loathed by the public. These companies have never faced real public dissatisfaction, they all imagine themselves to be the good guys, with the credibility of having created magical search engines and smartphones. But that era is gone. They are now akin to the bankers on Wall Street in 2008, and politicians are winning elections by saying they hate AI as much as the voters do."
Yeah I see this too. That we're not innovating any more also doesn't help make our industry look good
I'm in agreement with the general point but was big tech well liked in the early 2020s?
Facebook scandals had exploded already, Google had already long abandoned "don't be evil", nobody ever liked Microsoft, and I think sentiment towards Apple is somewhat unchanged.
Tech at least in my eyes peaked around 2018-19. That also coincided with the first more mainstream public-aware introduction of vision and NLP systems into tech products. A few years later it all went downhill for the tech companies.
You can't claim that the tech industry isn't innovating. You can say that innovation effort has shifted away from many things that still need it. The issue I have is that the companies and products are so large and complex that they are extremely difficult to compete with.
It's not just that we're not innovating on good new products. We're innovating new ways to break the law and exploit human psychology.
Blockchain/NFT hype did a ton of damage to tech's credibility, as well as Uber before it (along with the many Uber for X apps).
>But AI is absolutely loathed by the public.
by the public populating the echo chambers on reddit and bluesky, perhaps.
9.5 out of 10 normies use it daily now and have no negative opinions about it. the wholesome folx use it too, despite their incessant kvetching.
Most people I talk to use it because it's useful, but also hate what it means and what it is doing to the world.
There definitely has been a broad change in public perception of big tech and the future that it is taking us toward.
People began disliking big tech well before this latest bout of AI.
This is true but the last few years have seen this dislike grow and spread a lot more than it was before - in my personal experience.
This feeling made me leave the tech industry.
It felt like I was helping the bad guys, and my conscience couldn't deal with that.
Considering the search engine company is selling a very popular self driving taxi service, they seem to be quite credible and innovative.
[dead]