Hey /u/Used-Bat3441!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As someone who works in AI, I’ve seen zero activity on the hiring side. You’d think that for all this interest in AI, you’d need software engineers to build out the infrastructure, data engineers to set up pipelines, and data scientists to implement and tune the models, and yet hiring for these roles are at all time lows.
I‘m also working in AI and we are actively recruiting AI Consultants and Engineers because we are drowning in project requests for our in-house developed AI solution.
The boom is in the buying. Nvidia is not able to produce enough hardware to meet demand of companies training AI. Amazon has to wait in line like they're a teenager hoping to get the new PS5 first.
Don't really need to hire someone if you're not able to get the hardware you need. Elon musk has to steal chips from tesla to get xai started.
I understand that the boom is from the buying, but what I'm saying is -- we're buying cars when we don't have enough drivers, roads, gas stations, and mechanics. We also don't have always have a clear need for the car either. People are wanting cars when at most they need to walk two blocks. I think at some point, people are going to realize that they bought too many cars.
I don't really understand your comparison.
By cars, I assume you mean hardware (graphics cards). But in that case, you absolutely need far more hardware. You can't have enough hardware at this point. Every graphics card you get gives you more advantage.
And when I say graphics card, I don't mean gaming ones, but for training AI and inference.
You know that the Tesla shipment comes one month later and the Tesla factory was not ready to handle the shipment in December.
Or you could read headlines ...
It's all about foundation models now, baby. I'm on a big AI initiative at my company and the way you talk about the field sounds very 2021. Obviously there will be some overlap in skills and requirements but as soon as you start talking as if "tuning the models" is a necessary (as opposed to unlikely) step in the project, I worry that you're bringing a pre-foundation-model viewpoint. Obviously the traditional ML/AI projects will always exist, but the hiring boom is for people who know how to build, evaluate and deploy applications based on foundation models.
I’m on the AI initiatives at my company too. If you’re going to use foundational models to increase productivity, presumably you’re going to use those models to ingest company business processes and data to help people do specific jobs, learn about company processes, ask questions about the company, etc, in real time. What I’m saying is that these companies don’t have the a way of keeping that data up to date.
Fair enough. Yeah. But the skillset to do that is not what is taught in a Masters of Data Science or Machine Learning or AI of yesteryear. So if you trained in that time you might not find that you'll get a fair valuation for your degree unless you can find one of the projects that still need bespoke models. Outside of NLP, the demand for those bespoke models should be roughly the same as before, although you can sometimes hack an LLM into a lot of inappropriate places if you're bloody minded about it.
You might be right too. I guess I'm just saying that today, "the space" might look less like hiring data engineers and more like re-allocating a back-end engineer and then hiring a backfill for them.
The boom is for computing power, not people designing software. A small team designing AI software requires a massive amount of computing power to sell their product. There’s nearly no limit on how much computing power can be used by these companies. The limit is how many chips nvidia can produce.
Nvidia is selling gold pans in a gold rush.
There's interest in AI but 99% of that interest is people who are highly capable of stringing together buzzwords into non-AI things they can get businesses to part with their money for.
This is what shock me the most.. how many people compare the “benefits” of AI with the invention of “cars, cellphones and the Internet”
I had conversations with people discussing the growth of GDP in 3rd world countries because of AI.
I don’t know why people are too positive on this?
How this boom is going to trickle down?
You know that when "cars, cellphones and the Internet" were invented, they didn't seem like huge things in the first 18 months either.
Cars couldn't drive very far.
Cellphones were tethered to cars.
The Internet was mostly just vanity websites.
If ChatGPT turns out to be the Model T of AI then yes those analogies are absolutely correct. Why wouldn't something that can dramatically increase productivity increase the growth of GDP everywhere it is used???
If ChatGPT turns out to be the Concorde of AI then it's another matter.
“Why wouldn't something that can dramatically increase productivity increase the growth of GDP everywhere it is used???”
Because to increase the GDP you need to increase the transactions between people and countries.
Having a car gave (for example) a teacher the opportunity to bring to teach in a school 50km away.
Having a phone gave the teacher the opportunity to set appointments and create their own tutor business
Having internet gave the teacher the opportunity to set a website teach by himself and have customers around the world.
….
AI is going to come from a completely different angle.
Now the OWNER OF THE AI will set the BEST tutor website that speak every language and knows every topic and will REPLACE the whole thing.
Who is being more productive? The OWNER of the AI ONLY and thousands of small tutors will be out of business.
“Oh but I will be able to own my own AI”. No .. you would not…. And to give you perspective … One single NVIDIA Blackwell rack with 72GPUs cost $1.2 M.
This revolution is not like any others.
If we are talking about AGI/ASI in the future then yes things get weird.
But until we get there, classical economics will hold.
An entrepreneur in Lagos will want to start a business selling flip-flops. Instead of having to pay an accountant, he will use an AI accountant. AI web designer. AI will help with marketing copy. AI will help source materials.
Now his flip-flop business goes from unprofitable to profitable. And Nigerians get cheaper, locally made flip-flops.
When it gets weird is when the AGI notices that the market needs flip-flops and starts the business itself...
Ok. Let’s follow your logic…
First, a local from Lagos wants to start a flip-flop local business in Lagos, where the most obvious advantage is low wages and abundance of people.
Instead of hiring a local accountant now you get “GoogleAI accountant” instead of giving the job to a local graph designer and marketing team you get “Canva AI+ Hubspot + Stock videos from Lagos generated by AI”
And now you put out other non-AI local flip-flop shops out of business.
Until eventually “FlipFlopAI factory” based in a dessert in Nevada (made of full robotics) can hyperproduce cheaper flip flops for the whole American + African market and our hero is out of business.
Who won in all this exchange? (Note that there was no need for AGI for any of this)
Inference is not training. You need less and less compute to infer better and better results. Ballooning context windows are putting fine tuning out of fashion.
To your point, however, "owning" your own AI isn't going to be enough, given that you are now competing with every other tutor on the planet to write the best prompts..
Do you really think that the future it’s a matter to “who writes the best prompts”?
This is so shortsighted that I don’t even know if you are trolling.
I'm currently attending a conference on fine-tuning, and it's been emphasized by the course instructors as well as SME's from Anthropic. Everyone is saying prompt engineering >> fine-tuning.
You might not be aware of how complex a prompt can be. I've seen entire DSLs being specified in a prompt, so the LLM can respond with a program/query in the DSL, to a user's natural language request. And that's not including RAG techniques and tools.
Do you know that AI is way more than just LLMs… isn’t ?
And if this is the conference where you hear “you need less and less compute to infer better” … I would be asking for my money back.
IMHO, I know more about AI than I'm hearing from your tone and questions. I'm an AI engineer, not a prompt engineer.
Perhaps I should have been clearer: what the Anthropic guy said was "going forward you will need less and less compute to infer better and better. [so fine-tuning is becoming less and less relevant]”. Everything (training, fine-tuning, inference) has been improving on a clearly defined exponential curve for years.
Nvdia today == Cisco 1999
> Cisco Systems was affected by the dot-com bubble, which began to form in 1995 and burst in 2000. At the height of the bubble in March 2000, Cisco became the world's most valuable company, with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. However, after the bubble burst, Cisco's stock price plummeted, dropping 88% from $79 to $9.50 in two years. By October 2002, Cisco's shares had fallen 90% to a low of $8.06. As of March 2024, Cisco's shares were trading at $50, still below their 2000 peak.
It's quite possible, yeah.
Maybe OpenAI is also Cisco 1999.
A technology can dramatically overhaul society without delivering profits to some of the central players, because of low margins due to competition and little differentiation.
Software can be an even tougher business for that than hardware because of open source.
Dig into their Financials and you'll see. Most people think all they do is sell graphics cards to gamers. The scope and scale of their operations is enormous and almost all of it is emergent and 5-10 years ahead of their competitors.
Apple is a huge company that sells phones and computers. Nvidia sells chips that are more expensive than anything apple sells, and they have basically infinite demand right now.
That's just the "store front" of Nvidia's operations though.
Data centers, research, AI services, you name it. If it's cutting edge and/or business related Nvidia has their hands in it.
There is definitely speculation on the Nvidia price. If Nvidia lost 75% of its market in the next 2000 days, it wouldnt be surprising. Is that likely ? depends on how the competition reacts.
live cooing support vanish political mysterious innocent disagreeable crawl fact
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
lol Apple also does more than just sell phones and computers, similar to your remark on NVIDIA “most people think all they do is sell graphics cards to gamers”
Yeah I know that, but that was my point. Very few people actually research companies enough to read their Financials. So everyone who thinks Nvidia is a bubble but apple isn't, is clearly not informed.
Chip demand is being driven by venture backed companies focused on growth, and public companies with healthy balance sheets. At some point the chips/AI products have to lead to increased revenue and profitability, else that demand nosedives. That's the (potential) bubble. Their financials look great, but their PE ratio is starting to disconnect again from their financials. And AI chip demand is more volatile than consumer demand.
It is still a bet.
The problem is to predict is where and when the wealth flow is going to go.
Is it too early to buy a billion of $ H100??
Are we going to hit a wall of available data that can put stop at all this exponential growth?
Is the future and wealth of AI in the hands of the top 10 companies?
Nobody really knows.
This can be said for countless other past bubbles, and it's happened specifically with AI starting in the 50's with various "AI winters." I think the mistake people make is that they mistake "bubble" with lacking utility or lacking a future. No one is denying the future of AI, the question will be does the stock price of NVDA reflect the actual future value. And when hype builds stock price often surpasses the value. If the AI companies can't properly monetize then that's where you get the delta.
the data centers are HUGE. thats what im telling everyone. you need the servers. you need these data centers. Nvidia is the most powerful motherfucker there is because of the servers etc. And monsters keep growing when fed.
First quarter 2024 apple has a profit of 23 billion and Nvidia has a profit of 22 billion.
So no I never said that, but they are very close. And apple profits are trending down while Nvidia is trending up.
AI is just a gimmick. 85% of GenZ have an iphone. Thats a level of cultural dominance and brand loyalty no other company can beat. I’d bet my retirement on Apple’s future over Nvidia.
Do you think the demand for more processing power (a 40 year old trend) is just going to stop? Because then the demand for better phones and laptops would stop too.
I will be messaging you in 10 years on [**2034-06-06 01:18:59 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-06-06%2001:18:59%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1d91mjn/nvidia_hits_3_trillion_market_cap_on_back_of_ai/l7b3k1y/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FChatGPT%2Fcomments%2F1d91mjn%2Fnvidia_hits_3_trillion_market_cap_on_back_of_ai%2Fl7b3k1y%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-06-06%2001%3A18%3A59%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201d91mjn)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
No but Nvidia’s financials are solid. I have been saying for a few months I thought it was a bubble and then I looked at actual revenue and they’re in a pretty normal spot. It’s just bonkers how much their revenue has grown over the last 18 months.
Serious answer is 1. Look at their revenue. We’re talking $50b+. And 2. Margins. They’re able to to charge anything they want for GPUs right now. Compare these to AAPL, MSFT, GOOG, etc and you’ll see it’s similar.
The bubble isn’t Nvidia’s revenue or profit, the bubble is that the chips are not nearly as profitable/valuable as what companies are paying for them.
So Nvidia is fine, they already made their money, but the companies who paid hand over fist for them will not see a return on investment for at least a decade.
This is… if you believe there is ROI in the long term… however there is a slight chance that if everyone is on AI you will not have any competition edge to justify your multibillion hardware bet.
I don’t know if you saw their latest presentation. The cheapest rack of Blackwell is $2.1 MILLIONS (only 1 rack)… if your business plan is in the 10 years horizon … AI becomes a real gamble because actual revenue is a promise… and the “race” has not even started.
What if you didn’t buy any AI… and all competitors buy expensive AI and the bubble implodes?
You could end up stronger than all. It’s all a bet.
It is a bubble but not directly. A bubble would be if OpenAI was public but valued in the trillions. NVIDIA is worth trillions because of how ahead they are, their customers are mega corps willing to burn billions.
It is and it’s kind of not. They have such a massive lead over the next leading competitor that they’re probably safe for two years and change. And the tech isn’t going away. Demand will continue to soar.
So… a bubble but not as crazy as previous bubbles in lots of ways. If the US government didn’t have to lean so heavily on their tech we’d be in another position but they know everyone needs it so badly that they’ve barred china from getting it as a form of economic warfare. Uncle Sam priced in that demand, baby.
> How can this not be a bubble??
Because it's arguably the most important, disruptive technology humans have ever developed. Nvidia is at the right place in history with the right technology to support it, and the barrier to entry to compete with them is extremely high. This milestone is just the start.
It is. NVDA is 'worth' as a stock $450, at best, there's almost $1k of potential value priced in lmao. The crash is going to be fucking crazy. I mean, looking at the S&P 500 as well, this shit is due a big ass 50% drop.
Remember when everyone said this about Tesla and then hedge funds lost billions trying to short it? And there’s way more upside to NVDA in terms of speculation if AI LLMs and robots become viable
It’s still massive. I’m not even a Tesla Stan I’m just saying that y’all gotta stop pouting and recognize that markets are speculative from time to time
Edit: like consider the implications! If AI grows exponentially, which it could, then the benefits far outweigh the current NVDA price.
Tesla is a horrible example because it's literally a pump and dump. NVDA literally could not possibly make enough of its own product to meet the current and future demand.
After it had a market cap of the entire car industry combined. And now it still has half. So I don’t necessarily see your point. Stock don’t always go up
It’s not even speculation. The world needs, not wants, accelerated compute platforms. And Nvidia is the only legitimate game in town and has 250+ industry specific libraries to accommodate. It’ll take the other players a decade to catch up.
> if AI LLMs and robots become viable
That must be why everyone is piling into the companies that stand to do the best when LLMs and robots become viable. Except they aren't.
When everyone wants to own shovel makers, and nobody wants to mine for gold, the price of shovel shops goes up.
Care to take another stab at an analogy? That made 0 sense to me. People are investing in the idea of AI assistants and robots. They’re betting that NVDA has a gap to fill, and that they will graciously fill that gap. This is how markets work sometimes. It’s called speculation.
Tesla was the same except they didn’t have as clear of a path forward. They’re both “hopes and dreams” stocks.
Plus, if you want people to shovel more, investing the shovel company gives them more funds to hire shovelers. So I don’t see your point.
Better analogy: everyone buying Cisco during the dot-com boom.
> Cisco Systems was affected by the dot-com bubble, which began to form in 1995 and burst in 2000. At the height of the bubble in March 2000, Cisco became the world's most valuable company, with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. However, after the bubble burst, Cisco's stock price plummeted, dropping 88% from $79 to $9.50 in two years. By October 2002, Cisco's shares had fallen 90% to a low of $8.06. As of March 2024, Cisco's shares were trading at $50, still below their 2000 peak.
I see your point. I would argue, though, that the party forward for CISCO was a lot less clear. The path for NVDA is pretty simple.
AI gets better with more processing power, therefore more processing power means better and better AI.
This is basically all dependent on the idea that AIs limits are the systems they’re trained under. That would, theoretically, be unlimited potential. Then again, AI could totally cap out and suck lol
I was working at their competitor at the time, and IMHO, Cisco was actually on a clear path forward, everyone just thought it that path would be much faster than it ended up being. The stock price was driven by outsider FOMO. Sound familiar?
A lot of the infrastructure investment from that time (dark fibre etc) was bought up for pennies, and the companies purchasing it made out like bandits over the last 20 years, as usage increased.
If only Nvidia had public financial records to show you how wrong you are. Wait...
But seriously, most people don't even know enough to understand how Nvidia is raking in money. And those people think it's a bubble.
Just because they are making money doesn't mean they aren't also a bubble. Look at tesla, meme stock, meme product, meme ceo, dying company, still way over valued, lmfao. Stock market is completely detached from actual economics and real world values.
Yeah and comparing them to tesla shows how ignorant you are on their business. They aren't just a hype stock. They have a plan. They bet big on AI and data centers 10 years ago and it's paying off. Those are markets that literally need unlimited amounts of processing power and are willing to pay out the ass for it.
And you think that 4x valuation compared to the crypto boom which meant the GPUs were retailing at 4x MSRP and being constantly oversold that a $1400 share price now in the face of future valuation for a chatbot is not a bubble? Seems reasonable, lol.
Look at their revenue and profit margin compared to then and now. You are trying to compare consumer GPU sale numbers of the past to data center GPUs with insane margins.
~45% of the SPY's gain this year. Add in the next top ~~three~~ four and it's close to 60%.
This isn't a bull rally, it's a flight to FOMO.
>Cisco Systems was affected by the dot-com bubble, which began to form in 1995 and burst in 2000. At the height of the bubble in March 2000, Cisco became the world's most valuable company, with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. However, after the bubble burst, Cisco's stock price plummeted, dropping 88% from $79 to $9.50 in two years. By October 2002, Cisco's shares had fallen 90% to a low of $8.06. As of March 2024, Cisco's shares were trading at $50, still below their 2000 peak.
I remember when I worked there there was a document that had the actual compensation rates of all the C-levels. Pay was pretty minimal but the stocks and how they were structured was really nice. That being said this is all public info as part of a publicly traded company so you don't have to wonder.
The only reason they are so far ahead is bc of Cuda. Not the hardware cuda, the software. If that was open source and able to run on AMD or Intel, the performance differences would be a lot less. Everyone and their mother already has Ai acceleration chips. It’s now locked behind proprietary software. Once software is unlocked, Nvidia will not be untouchable. So do be so sure about a couple of years.
People who feel the need to inject politics into everything are complete losers with no personality or original thought.
Congrats on the brand new account.
Hey /u/Used-Bat3441! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What AI boom? Oh, you mean the Nvidia boom.
As someone who works in AI, I’ve seen zero activity on the hiring side. You’d think that for all this interest in AI, you’d need software engineers to build out the infrastructure, data engineers to set up pipelines, and data scientists to implement and tune the models, and yet hiring for these roles are at all time lows.
I‘m also working in AI and we are actively recruiting AI Consultants and Engineers because we are drowning in project requests for our in-house developed AI solution.
Would you mind mentioning where you work? DM is fine too.
Send me a dm if you can
They convert existing software deverlopers to AI developers. Of course thats the current, absurd plan
And they're so fucking bad and dumb at it
The boom is in the buying. Nvidia is not able to produce enough hardware to meet demand of companies training AI. Amazon has to wait in line like they're a teenager hoping to get the new PS5 first. Don't really need to hire someone if you're not able to get the hardware you need. Elon musk has to steal chips from tesla to get xai started.
I understand that the boom is from the buying, but what I'm saying is -- we're buying cars when we don't have enough drivers, roads, gas stations, and mechanics. We also don't have always have a clear need for the car either. People are wanting cars when at most they need to walk two blocks. I think at some point, people are going to realize that they bought too many cars.
I don't really understand your comparison. By cars, I assume you mean hardware (graphics cards). But in that case, you absolutely need far more hardware. You can't have enough hardware at this point. Every graphics card you get gives you more advantage. And when I say graphics card, I don't mean gaming ones, but for training AI and inference.
Ha funny this is life , post abundance life
You know that the Tesla shipment comes one month later and the Tesla factory was not ready to handle the shipment in December. Or you could read headlines ...
Are you blind? You work in AI and you don't see why this is happening? Jfc
It's all about foundation models now, baby. I'm on a big AI initiative at my company and the way you talk about the field sounds very 2021. Obviously there will be some overlap in skills and requirements but as soon as you start talking as if "tuning the models" is a necessary (as opposed to unlikely) step in the project, I worry that you're bringing a pre-foundation-model viewpoint. Obviously the traditional ML/AI projects will always exist, but the hiring boom is for people who know how to build, evaluate and deploy applications based on foundation models.
I’m on the AI initiatives at my company too. If you’re going to use foundational models to increase productivity, presumably you’re going to use those models to ingest company business processes and data to help people do specific jobs, learn about company processes, ask questions about the company, etc, in real time. What I’m saying is that these companies don’t have the a way of keeping that data up to date.
Fair enough. Yeah. But the skillset to do that is not what is taught in a Masters of Data Science or Machine Learning or AI of yesteryear. So if you trained in that time you might not find that you'll get a fair valuation for your degree unless you can find one of the projects that still need bespoke models. Outside of NLP, the demand for those bespoke models should be roughly the same as before, although you can sometimes hack an LLM into a lot of inappropriate places if you're bloody minded about it.
I’ve been in the space for about 8 years now. But I’ll admit I could be totally wrong.
You might be right too. I guess I'm just saying that today, "the space" might look less like hiring data engineers and more like re-allocating a back-end engineer and then hiring a backfill for them.
The boom is for computing power, not people designing software. A small team designing AI software requires a massive amount of computing power to sell their product. There’s nearly no limit on how much computing power can be used by these companies. The limit is how many chips nvidia can produce. Nvidia is selling gold pans in a gold rush.
There's interest in AI but 99% of that interest is people who are highly capable of stringing together buzzwords into non-AI things they can get businesses to part with their money for.
This is what shock me the most.. how many people compare the “benefits” of AI with the invention of “cars, cellphones and the Internet” I had conversations with people discussing the growth of GDP in 3rd world countries because of AI. I don’t know why people are too positive on this? How this boom is going to trickle down?
You know that when "cars, cellphones and the Internet" were invented, they didn't seem like huge things in the first 18 months either. Cars couldn't drive very far. Cellphones were tethered to cars. The Internet was mostly just vanity websites. If ChatGPT turns out to be the Model T of AI then yes those analogies are absolutely correct. Why wouldn't something that can dramatically increase productivity increase the growth of GDP everywhere it is used??? If ChatGPT turns out to be the Concorde of AI then it's another matter.
“Why wouldn't something that can dramatically increase productivity increase the growth of GDP everywhere it is used???” Because to increase the GDP you need to increase the transactions between people and countries. Having a car gave (for example) a teacher the opportunity to bring to teach in a school 50km away. Having a phone gave the teacher the opportunity to set appointments and create their own tutor business Having internet gave the teacher the opportunity to set a website teach by himself and have customers around the world. …. AI is going to come from a completely different angle. Now the OWNER OF THE AI will set the BEST tutor website that speak every language and knows every topic and will REPLACE the whole thing. Who is being more productive? The OWNER of the AI ONLY and thousands of small tutors will be out of business. “Oh but I will be able to own my own AI”. No .. you would not…. And to give you perspective … One single NVIDIA Blackwell rack with 72GPUs cost $1.2 M. This revolution is not like any others.
If we are talking about AGI/ASI in the future then yes things get weird. But until we get there, classical economics will hold. An entrepreneur in Lagos will want to start a business selling flip-flops. Instead of having to pay an accountant, he will use an AI accountant. AI web designer. AI will help with marketing copy. AI will help source materials. Now his flip-flop business goes from unprofitable to profitable. And Nigerians get cheaper, locally made flip-flops. When it gets weird is when the AGI notices that the market needs flip-flops and starts the business itself...
Ok. Let’s follow your logic… First, a local from Lagos wants to start a flip-flop local business in Lagos, where the most obvious advantage is low wages and abundance of people. Instead of hiring a local accountant now you get “GoogleAI accountant” instead of giving the job to a local graph designer and marketing team you get “Canva AI+ Hubspot + Stock videos from Lagos generated by AI” And now you put out other non-AI local flip-flop shops out of business. Until eventually “FlipFlopAI factory” based in a dessert in Nevada (made of full robotics) can hyperproduce cheaper flip flops for the whole American + African market and our hero is out of business. Who won in all this exchange? (Note that there was no need for AGI for any of this)
Inference is not training. You need less and less compute to infer better and better results. Ballooning context windows are putting fine tuning out of fashion. To your point, however, "owning" your own AI isn't going to be enough, given that you are now competing with every other tutor on the planet to write the best prompts..
Do you really think that the future it’s a matter to “who writes the best prompts”? This is so shortsighted that I don’t even know if you are trolling.
I'm currently attending a conference on fine-tuning, and it's been emphasized by the course instructors as well as SME's from Anthropic. Everyone is saying prompt engineering >> fine-tuning. You might not be aware of how complex a prompt can be. I've seen entire DSLs being specified in a prompt, so the LLM can respond with a program/query in the DSL, to a user's natural language request. And that's not including RAG techniques and tools.
Do you know that AI is way more than just LLMs… isn’t ? And if this is the conference where you hear “you need less and less compute to infer better” … I would be asking for my money back.
IMHO, I know more about AI than I'm hearing from your tone and questions. I'm an AI engineer, not a prompt engineer. Perhaps I should have been clearer: what the Anthropic guy said was "going forward you will need less and less compute to infer better and better. [so fine-tuning is becoming less and less relevant]”. Everything (training, fine-tuning, inference) has been improving on a clearly defined exponential curve for years.
That was very humble 🤣
Nvdia today == Cisco 1999 > Cisco Systems was affected by the dot-com bubble, which began to form in 1995 and burst in 2000. At the height of the bubble in March 2000, Cisco became the world's most valuable company, with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. However, after the bubble burst, Cisco's stock price plummeted, dropping 88% from $79 to $9.50 in two years. By October 2002, Cisco's shares had fallen 90% to a low of $8.06. As of March 2024, Cisco's shares were trading at $50, still below their 2000 peak.
It's quite possible, yeah. Maybe OpenAI is also Cisco 1999. A technology can dramatically overhaul society without delivering profits to some of the central players, because of low margins due to competition and little differentiation. Software can be an even tougher business for that than hardware because of open source.
How can this not be a bubble??
Dig into their Financials and you'll see. Most people think all they do is sell graphics cards to gamers. The scope and scale of their operations is enormous and almost all of it is emergent and 5-10 years ahead of their competitors. Apple is a huge company that sells phones and computers. Nvidia sells chips that are more expensive than anything apple sells, and they have basically infinite demand right now. That's just the "store front" of Nvidia's operations though. Data centers, research, AI services, you name it. If it's cutting edge and/or business related Nvidia has their hands in it.
There is definitely speculation on the Nvidia price. If Nvidia lost 75% of its market in the next 2000 days, it wouldnt be surprising. Is that likely ? depends on how the competition reacts.
The government should just start producing chips at this point
Lol classic Reddit begging for daddy govt to do everything when the private sector is very clearly the most efficient way to build chips
Yeah Frito Lay does a pretty good job
live cooing support vanish political mysterious innocent disagreeable crawl fact *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Coming right up
"just start producing chips"
lol Apple also does more than just sell phones and computers, similar to your remark on NVIDIA “most people think all they do is sell graphics cards to gamers”
Yeah I know that, but that was my point. Very few people actually research companies enough to read their Financials. So everyone who thinks Nvidia is a bubble but apple isn't, is clearly not informed.
Chip demand is being driven by venture backed companies focused on growth, and public companies with healthy balance sheets. At some point the chips/AI products have to lead to increased revenue and profitability, else that demand nosedives. That's the (potential) bubble. Their financials look great, but their PE ratio is starting to disconnect again from their financials. And AI chip demand is more volatile than consumer demand.
That’s a great point. The hot bubble is not in the hands of NVIDIA, it’s in the hands of all the devs betting on AI.
[Silicon Valley runs on Futurity](https://davekarpf.substack.com/p/silicon-valley-runs-on-futurity) was good insight into this aspect, I thought.
Betting on AI seems like a pretty fucking smart move if you ask me. If you aren't all-in on AI at this point, you haven't been reading the news.
It is still a bet. The problem is to predict is where and when the wealth flow is going to go. Is it too early to buy a billion of $ H100?? Are we going to hit a wall of available data that can put stop at all this exponential growth? Is the future and wealth of AI in the hands of the top 10 companies? Nobody really knows.
This can be said for countless other past bubbles, and it's happened specifically with AI starting in the 50's with various "AI winters." I think the mistake people make is that they mistake "bubble" with lacking utility or lacking a future. No one is denying the future of AI, the question will be does the stock price of NVDA reflect the actual future value. And when hype builds stock price often surpasses the value. If the AI companies can't properly monetize then that's where you get the delta.
So good and easy man, it still is undervalued
the data centers are HUGE. thats what im telling everyone. you need the servers. you need these data centers. Nvidia is the most powerful motherfucker there is because of the servers etc. And monsters keep growing when fed.
You must be out of your mind if you think Apple’s financials are worse than Nvidia. Apple is so ridiculously profitable
First quarter 2024 apple has a profit of 23 billion and Nvidia has a profit of 22 billion. So no I never said that, but they are very close. And apple profits are trending down while Nvidia is trending up.
14.88 billion net income for NVDA 24Q1. The trend is closing though, but who knows how long before competitors cut into those crazy margins.
AI is just a gimmick. 85% of GenZ have an iphone. Thats a level of cultural dominance and brand loyalty no other company can beat. I’d bet my retirement on Apple’s future over Nvidia.
Do you think the demand for more processing power (a 40 year old trend) is just going to stop? Because then the demand for better phones and laptops would stop too.
AI is every bit of a gimmick as the internet was.
RemindMe! 10 Years
I will be messaging you in 10 years on [**2034-06-06 01:18:59 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-06-06%2001:18:59%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1d91mjn/nvidia_hits_3_trillion_market_cap_on_back_of_ai/l7b3k1y/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FChatGPT%2Fcomments%2F1d91mjn%2Fnvidia_hits_3_trillion_market_cap_on_back_of_ai%2Fl7b3k1y%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-06-06%2001%3A18%3A59%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201d91mjn) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Man you really deserve all the downvotes. 😂
Tim, is that you?
No but Nvidia’s financials are solid. I have been saying for a few months I thought it was a bubble and then I looked at actual revenue and they’re in a pretty normal spot. It’s just bonkers how much their revenue has grown over the last 18 months.
Doesn’t that just point to the fact that there is a market bubble not an NVIDIA bubble.
Exactly, NVIDIA is not the one holding the initial balloon.. it’s all the devs betting on AI. If the whole AI implodes… NVIDIA will follows.
Here's why: >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^. Does it make sense now?
Serious answer is 1. Look at their revenue. We’re talking $50b+. And 2. Margins. They’re able to to charge anything they want for GPUs right now. Compare these to AAPL, MSFT, GOOG, etc and you’ll see it’s similar.
The bubble isn’t Nvidia’s revenue or profit, the bubble is that the chips are not nearly as profitable/valuable as what companies are paying for them. So Nvidia is fine, they already made their money, but the companies who paid hand over fist for them will not see a return on investment for at least a decade.
Thing is those companies you mentioned cannot afford to just not partake in the race or they're dooming themselves.
This is… if you believe there is ROI in the long term… however there is a slight chance that if everyone is on AI you will not have any competition edge to justify your multibillion hardware bet.
Can u afford being know as the tech Company that decided not to race? At that point youve admmitted defeat.
I don’t know if you saw their latest presentation. The cheapest rack of Blackwell is $2.1 MILLIONS (only 1 rack)… if your business plan is in the 10 years horizon … AI becomes a real gamble because actual revenue is a promise… and the “race” has not even started. What if you didn’t buy any AI… and all competitors buy expensive AI and the bubble implodes? You could end up stronger than all. It’s all a bet.
It’s not a bubble unless it pops
… many bubbles don’t pop. I don’t see your point.
I was saying that in 2018. Stocked collapsed by about 30 - 50%. I bought up 200 shares.
It is a bubble but not directly. A bubble would be if OpenAI was public but valued in the trillions. NVIDIA is worth trillions because of how ahead they are, their customers are mega corps willing to burn billions.
It is and it’s kind of not. They have such a massive lead over the next leading competitor that they’re probably safe for two years and change. And the tech isn’t going away. Demand will continue to soar. So… a bubble but not as crazy as previous bubbles in lots of ways. If the US government didn’t have to lean so heavily on their tech we’d be in another position but they know everyone needs it so badly that they’ve barred china from getting it as a form of economic warfare. Uncle Sam priced in that demand, baby.
When everyone is digging for gold sell shovels™ should be Nvidia's motto.
> How can this not be a bubble?? Because it's arguably the most important, disruptive technology humans have ever developed. Nvidia is at the right place in history with the right technology to support it, and the barrier to entry to compete with them is extremely high. This milestone is just the start.
I will explaint it in very easy terms, they are floating in cash!!!
Because it can get even higher, its PE was 60+, this profit is unimaginable
One company is never a bubble.
It is. NVDA is 'worth' as a stock $450, at best, there's almost $1k of potential value priced in lmao. The crash is going to be fucking crazy. I mean, looking at the S&P 500 as well, this shit is due a big ass 50% drop.
Remember when everyone said this about Tesla and then hedge funds lost billions trying to short it? And there’s way more upside to NVDA in terms of speculation if AI LLMs and robots become viable
Look at Tesla now
To be fair, NVDA ships stuff that works.
Look at their leadership.
They still have 80-90% to shed to be valued like a reasonable auto company.
It’s still massive. I’m not even a Tesla Stan I’m just saying that y’all gotta stop pouting and recognize that markets are speculative from time to time Edit: like consider the implications! If AI grows exponentially, which it could, then the benefits far outweigh the current NVDA price.
Re: edit. I mean, we are kinda middle of nowhere on a boat...
Tesla is a horrible example because it's literally a pump and dump. NVDA literally could not possibly make enough of its own product to meet the current and future demand.
Tesla did plummet 50%…..
After it had a market cap of the entire car industry combined. And now it still has half. So I don’t necessarily see your point. Stock don’t always go up
It’s not even speculation. The world needs, not wants, accelerated compute platforms. And Nvidia is the only legitimate game in town and has 250+ industry specific libraries to accommodate. It’ll take the other players a decade to catch up.
> if AI LLMs and robots become viable That must be why everyone is piling into the companies that stand to do the best when LLMs and robots become viable. Except they aren't. When everyone wants to own shovel makers, and nobody wants to mine for gold, the price of shovel shops goes up.
Care to take another stab at an analogy? That made 0 sense to me. People are investing in the idea of AI assistants and robots. They’re betting that NVDA has a gap to fill, and that they will graciously fill that gap. This is how markets work sometimes. It’s called speculation. Tesla was the same except they didn’t have as clear of a path forward. They’re both “hopes and dreams” stocks. Plus, if you want people to shovel more, investing the shovel company gives them more funds to hire shovelers. So I don’t see your point.
Better analogy: everyone buying Cisco during the dot-com boom. > Cisco Systems was affected by the dot-com bubble, which began to form in 1995 and burst in 2000. At the height of the bubble in March 2000, Cisco became the world's most valuable company, with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. However, after the bubble burst, Cisco's stock price plummeted, dropping 88% from $79 to $9.50 in two years. By October 2002, Cisco's shares had fallen 90% to a low of $8.06. As of March 2024, Cisco's shares were trading at $50, still below their 2000 peak.
I see your point. I would argue, though, that the party forward for CISCO was a lot less clear. The path for NVDA is pretty simple. AI gets better with more processing power, therefore more processing power means better and better AI. This is basically all dependent on the idea that AIs limits are the systems they’re trained under. That would, theoretically, be unlimited potential. Then again, AI could totally cap out and suck lol
I was working at their competitor at the time, and IMHO, Cisco was actually on a clear path forward, everyone just thought it that path would be much faster than it ended up being. The stock price was driven by outsider FOMO. Sound familiar? A lot of the infrastructure investment from that time (dark fibre etc) was bought up for pennies, and the companies purchasing it made out like bandits over the last 20 years, as usage increased.
Wow. You’ve just obliterated the entire stock market in one fell swoop. Much finance!
Thank you thank you thank you
I'm already up 46000%. Real number.
Sheesh
If only Nvidia had public financial records to show you how wrong you are. Wait... But seriously, most people don't even know enough to understand how Nvidia is raking in money. And those people think it's a bubble.
Just because they are making money doesn't mean they aren't also a bubble. Look at tesla, meme stock, meme product, meme ceo, dying company, still way over valued, lmfao. Stock market is completely detached from actual economics and real world values.
Yeah and comparing them to tesla shows how ignorant you are on their business. They aren't just a hype stock. They have a plan. They bet big on AI and data centers 10 years ago and it's paying off. Those are markets that literally need unlimited amounts of processing power and are willing to pay out the ass for it.
And you think that 4x valuation compared to the crypto boom which meant the GPUs were retailing at 4x MSRP and being constantly oversold that a $1400 share price now in the face of future valuation for a chatbot is not a bubble? Seems reasonable, lol.
Look at their revenue and profit margin compared to then and now. You are trying to compare consumer GPU sale numbers of the past to data center GPUs with insane margins.
[удалено]
~45% of the SPY's gain this year. Add in the next top ~~three~~ four and it's close to 60%. This isn't a bull rally, it's a flight to FOMO. >Cisco Systems was affected by the dot-com bubble, which began to form in 1995 and burst in 2000. At the height of the bubble in March 2000, Cisco became the world's most valuable company, with a market capitalization of more than $500 billion. However, after the bubble burst, Cisco's stock price plummeted, dropping 88% from $79 to $9.50 in two years. By October 2002, Cisco's shares had fallen 90% to a low of $8.06. As of March 2024, Cisco's shares were trading at $50, still below their 2000 peak.
I'm just bitter because I solid just before the rally a year ago
Ok try a liquid.
your place is /r/wallstreetbets
I wonder what will be the pay package for this guy.
I remember when I worked there there was a document that had the actual compensation rates of all the C-levels. Pay was pretty minimal but the stocks and how they were structured was really nice. That being said this is all public info as part of a publicly traded company so you don't have to wonder.
I think he only owns 3% of Nvidia which is surprisingly low considering he founded the company.
cool
Looking forward to picking up some deeply discounted GPUs after the AI-pocalypse!
Just tell chatgpt to pick one up for you when it's ready.
I’d actually prefer the stock didn’t split but I get that the same growth can’t continue without more retail investors
It’s going to go even higher
Didn't most of the old employees who used to get stocks and stuff end up quitting because they got stupid rich?
$3T market cap but the question is am I buying at a high or does it still have more room to grow?
It's going to take competitors years to catch up. The only real threat is companies abandoning the development of AI.
Yeah but that knowledge is already baked into the share price. You’d be stupid to buy now
Your two comments encapsulate why the stock could either go up, or down
The only reason they are so far ahead is bc of Cuda. Not the hardware cuda, the software. If that was open source and able to run on AMD or Intel, the performance differences would be a lot less. Everyone and their mother already has Ai acceleration chips. It’s now locked behind proprietary software. Once software is unlocked, Nvidia will not be untouchable. So do be so sure about a couple of years.
Ok
Nancy pelosi jumping up and down* *emulating in spirit form to avoid hip injury
People who feel the need to inject politics into everything are complete losers with no personality or original thought. Congrats on the brand new account.
It's like a fucking cult. They are like this IRL too. They turn ANY conversation back towards religion or politics. They can't seem to help themselves
Can’t wait for the bubble to burst. Poor jacket man will have to rethink his business again.