this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2026
684 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

87417 readers
3841 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
684
AI bet goes awry: Oracle fires 21,000 employees (www.jpost.com)
submitted 3 weeks ago by sanitation@lemmy.today to c/technology@lemmy.world
160 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

it uses a lot less energy since it runs on your home or company's infrastructure.

A CPU-cycle requires energy no matter where it is. The open source models may be more efficient, or you may distribute the power usage over a greater geographical area. But you're not using less energy because you're running the model at home.

Because of that, I predict that we're going to see a lot of financial hardship among AI companies.

I do like the idea that open source will kill tech giants.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

You are correct. OpenAI etc. valuations are based on the difference between revenue and cost. The key part is that open source breaks the monopoly. It stops excessive rent being charged (now or in the future) to use Ai models.

Tech giants will still exist, but closed model advantages won't.

[–] turdburglar@piefed.social 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

i thought tech valuations were based off of vibes and social currency

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Initially maybe. Long term, money has to be returned.

[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If the valuation were based on the marginal cost OpenAI and Anthropic would be worth negative a trillion dollars...

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Current marginal cost is certainly negative.

The expectation is that development costs will get cheaper (model design solidifies), Training costs will get cheaper (no need to retrain the whole model) and running costs will get cheaper (datacenter economies of scale).

All this is still true.

OpenAI, anthropic, Google etc. will generate excessive by being able to charge more than cost because their models are vastly superior.

Is likely to be false.

[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

Datacenter economies of scale do not seem to be panning out, 'cause they're buying into a RAM cartel who knows they're desperate.

Coreweave's reports say that the GPUs are 85% of the cost of a data center, and that they'll last 6 usable years. This isn't like building a facility like TSMC, datacenters feel more like COGS than capital to me, and those aren't businesses I would want anything to do with even if I didn't think they were all run by conmen who are rapists or racists or both.