I just want it all to go bust so people stop talking to me about how great their sloppified project is. They can all go cry in a corner when Codex and Claude just aren’t there anymore, and they can’t be arsed to do any work for themselves.
Omg. Watch Ai be the thing that ends capitalism. “Well obviously we cant let profits get in the way of being first to agi”
Who am i kidding they will just leash taxpayers with the burdem like always if they bailout…
Aren’t some datacenters already making nearby residents pay for their electricity bills?
OpenSI… You enemas of the state
ClosedSlop
Let’s hope they go bust this year already! Followed by the other “companies”. Fuck AI. Oh no… Now I’m tRump 's enemy 😂
They raised $122-123B this year to bring $50 billion revenue, $20B less than expected. Looks like very sustainable business to me. Even if they bring those $68B that’s still 50% burned. Don’t you fucking see it ?
And it’s all because their models are super under-optimised.
You’d think otherwise with how capable Opus and Fable are, but it’s just because the internal harness hides the thinking process, resulting in wildly improved output at the cost of 3-5x more compute being burned.
If they tossed one of the more capable open models in (looking at you, Qwen3.8/Qwen4), those costs would go down a lot.
Anthropic raised $105B in 2026. $10.9B Q2 revenue. That’s at most $50B revenue per year. It’s still 50% burned. Don’t you fucking see it ?
deleted by creator
None of the LLMs could figure out what I meant when asked “Find me lion and the lamb iconography examples used before the messianic age”. They kept instead pulling up Christian things specifically (even though Judaism beats it by hundreds of years). Even when I emphasized to ignore Christianity / Christian sources they’d keep insisting on it.
It doesn’t matter how you process the data - looped transformer, harnesses, etc. These are still glorified overgrown statistics machines, and will default to whatever floods it’s data the most because there is ZERO intelligence.
I’ve also checked how they do code, and it’s terrible. The great for very beginner stuff or boiler plate code. By anything as advanced as a website and it’s shit.
Sure, it technically can make a functional website. I tested it just to see how it works. But it does it the equivalent way a human technically can make a functional car out of cobbled together scraps from a scrap yard. It used SO MANY <div> classes for no goddamn reason. So much inline CSS too. It’s like, good fucking luck fixing an issue manually and unravelling the tangle of containers it’s made. You’d have to use the LLM again just to change things at that point because it’d be easier, and hope it doesn’t break a button. Mind you this is a simple HTML and CSS website, not even JavaScript. There’s no way in hell I’d trust anything more complex created via vibe coding.
I definitely agree LLMs generate a lot of bloated code.
Look, LLMs are pattern identifiers. They identity patterns. They don’t guess. Guessing is what humans do. They ‘latch’ onto a pattern. They don’t learn patterns, they recognise them. Yes, is what studies have shown. LLMs don’t learn gradually like Humans. They “latch” onto patterns. It’s not sentient. It’s just a machine learning algorithm, and if you think any of the AI that came before LLM is intelligent, then even LLMs are intelligent. If you think deep learning algorithms are just non linear matrix multiplications, they’re exactly that.
LLMs coming for Coding jobs isn’t because they’re superhuman intelligent, its cause what most coders do is mostly same things. LLMs cannot do novel architecture, but if it’s similar to 50 different softwares who’s code it has trained on, yes, LLMs can so that.
LLMs are marvelous machines. They’re not sentient, and only intelligent if you’re willing to call every other ML algorithm intelligent. But the underlying statistics algorithm can and will keep getting better and/or more efficient, that was the point I was trying to make earlier.
Edit: actually you make some more good points. If LLM gets free reign over a project, they do make code unreadable. And Idk if that problem will be solved. It’s just too much code they write, and efficiency is not something their training data gave them.
⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⣶⣶ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣀⣀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠁⠀⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⠿⠿⠻⠿⠿⠟⠿⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⢰⣹⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣭⣷⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠤⠄⠀⠀⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢾⣿⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⡠⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠠⣿⣿⣷⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢄⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿So cool! I don’t think I’ve ever seen a braille image render before.
my blind cousing ain’t seen one either
Much bigger deal when you realize they’re talking revenue because there was already zero profits…
In fact, the word “profit” doesn’t appear at all in this article, or most ones about chat or companies
They have like half a trillion in debt. Profit is a pipe dream
Nice. Please die faster
They’re still on track to reach $50 billion revenue
Revenue != Profit
Yeah no one here is confusing the two. A lot of people however do seem to miss that to investors (of all sectors, not just AI) running at a deficit is not necessarily something to shy away from. Most companies that are expanding extremely fast are run at deficits because building out a company usually costs more than it initially makes. So if you can show high revenue and in particular YoY growth (and they actually do) being at a deficit is not as big of an issue to investors.
I think what makes this worse is that their deficits are in the 10s of billions compared to most other startups being in the millions, even if the revenue to expenses ratio is better.
If I start a tech company and I spend 100 million dollars but only pull in 10 million in revenue, that’s not great having a 10:1 expense to revenue ratio and 90 million in debt. In the leaked openAI financials from earlier this year, it was something like 13 billion revenue to 33 billion expenses, or about 3:1 expenses to revenue, which certainly seems better. However, the magnitude in actual costs is so much bigger at that point and the risk so much higher for investors. A billionaire can stand to lose on a 90 mill dollar investment, but it hurts a lot more on a 10 billion dollar investment.
And also, what’s their path to profitablity? The premiere models are already expensive and getting more expensive. They’d have to charge significantly more to start breaking even, and people just won’t pay for that. The cost to continue building and maintaining new DCs is t going to lessen the expenses either. I just think at some point investors are going to realize they aren’t going to get an ROI on their investment and either cut back or drop out all together.
I, too, could make $50 billion in revenue if you gave me $250 billion.
alt title: their losses are $20bn larger than expected
They couldn’t even do it with an “annualized run rate”!
Next year they’re going to take their highest earning 4 hours and multiply it by 2200.
So profits are -$920bn instead of -$900bn?
Did they ask chatgpt to do their revenue projection?
No. They just lied.
Flushing money down the toilet, or setting a very large pile of it on fire, would’ve had the same effect of loss while being less environmentally impactful.
Anyone actually paying attention is very unsurprised by this
I am surprised it got made public.
just ask chatgpt to check in the couch cushions
Stop the avocado toast and buy bootstraps.
