Even though I agree with you, I think OP is saying the same thing but in a nutshell and with more emotion than logic. They’re not wrong but not correct because it’s not the full answer.
CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman, a billionaire, said he thinks it’s terrible for people have RAM. He said it in the context of being against local inference. It’s really not hard to see what they really think. They want to hoard all the RAM and make you rent it from them.
We live in a weird late stage capitalist situation where the producer sees the consumer as competition which is why we’re seeing the artificial scarcity and GPUs just sitting idle in warehouses.
Once again, you are misusing the word competition. Consumers aren’t producing RAM, adding supply to the market, or competing with another company for sales.
If these companies want to rent computing power to consumers while reserving the RAM supply for themselves, they are consolidating control over the market. That’s a supply-side market concentration issue, not competition between consumers and manufacturers.
Sam Altman, OpenAI, and other tech executives don’t view the consumer base as competition. They view consumers as potential customers for their computing services. They want to own the infrastructure and rent access to it. A consumer renting computing power from a company isn’t competing with that company.
You’re confusing two entirely different economic concepts. You’re wrong, and I’m not saying that to be mean. I’m simply pointing out an objective distinction in how competition works in economics.
No, you just don’t really understand what you’re reading and you’re arguing shit the guy isn’t even saying.
ITT: Talk of ECONOMIC COMPETITION in the sense of a multiple companies chasing the same consumers, and there is also LITERAL FUCKING COMPETITION FOR WHO GETS TO USE THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF CHIPS PRODUCED.
He keeps talking about the second point and you keep pointing at the first one, which isn’t really what he was fucking talking about.
This is the entirety of OP’s post. It is factually and objectively incorrect. It doesn’t have a second point, and it barely has a first.
Consumers competing to buy RAM because of some supposed scarcity simply isn’t happening. If you have the money, you can buy all the RAM you want. It’s in stock practically everywhere; it’s just incredibly expensive. That’s an entirely different kind of market dynamic. It’s called demand. The idea that consumers are somehow fighting over a limited supply of RAM is nonsense.
Companies aren’t chasing customers or anyone else for that matter. They’re supplying RAM to whoever is willing to pay the most for it, i.e., data centers and AI technology companies. They’re actively prioritizing those customers and refusing to supply the consumer market. That’s the exact opposite of competing for consumers.
If a new company enters the market and begins supplying RAM to meet consumer demand, there will be very little competition for those customers. In fact, consumers will buy from them hand over fist because there’s an underserved market waiting to be supplied.
I 100% understand what I’m reading, which is precisely why I’m commenting on it and explaining not only why this isn’t competition but also why OP fundamentally misunderstands what competition actually is.
Apparently, you’re also struggling with some rather basic, ninth-grade economics. 🤷
And the sheer confidence with which you proclaim such simple-minded nonsense is… incredible.
Even though I agree with you, I think OP is saying the same thing but in a nutshell and with more emotion than logic. They’re not wrong but not correct because it’s not the full answer.
CEO of OpenAI Sam Altman, a billionaire, said he thinks it’s terrible for people have RAM. He said it in the context of being against local inference. It’s really not hard to see what they really think. They want to hoard all the RAM and make you rent it from them.
Ah that’s a didn’t perspective. I see what you’re saying now. Well done.
We live in a weird late stage capitalist situation where the producer sees the consumer as competition which is why we’re seeing the artificial scarcity and GPUs just sitting idle in warehouses.
Once again, you are misusing the word competition. Consumers aren’t producing RAM, adding supply to the market, or competing with another company for sales.
If these companies want to rent computing power to consumers while reserving the RAM supply for themselves, they are consolidating control over the market. That’s a supply-side market concentration issue, not competition between consumers and manufacturers.
Sam Altman, OpenAI, and other tech executives don’t view the consumer base as competition. They view consumers as potential customers for their computing services. They want to own the infrastructure and rent access to it. A consumer renting computing power from a company isn’t competing with that company.
You’re confusing two entirely different economic concepts. You’re wrong, and I’m not saying that to be mean. I’m simply pointing out an objective distinction in how competition works in economics.
Why would I buy what they’re selling when I can run their product on my gaming computer?
I have no idea… Why would you buy what they’re selling if you can run it on your gaming computer?
You doing something on your own in the same way a company would do it for profit still isn’t competition as defined by economics.
You still don’t know what competition means.
No, you just don’t really understand what you’re reading and you’re arguing shit the guy isn’t even saying.
ITT: Talk of ECONOMIC COMPETITION in the sense of a multiple companies chasing the same consumers, and there is also LITERAL FUCKING COMPETITION FOR WHO GETS TO USE THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF CHIPS PRODUCED.
He keeps talking about the second point and you keep pointing at the first one, which isn’t really what he was fucking talking about.
Ah indeed, thank you.
This is the entirety of OP’s post. It is factually and objectively incorrect. It doesn’t have a second point, and it barely has a first.
Consumers competing to buy RAM because of some supposed scarcity simply isn’t happening. If you have the money, you can buy all the RAM you want. It’s in stock practically everywhere; it’s just incredibly expensive. That’s an entirely different kind of market dynamic. It’s called demand. The idea that consumers are somehow fighting over a limited supply of RAM is nonsense.
Companies aren’t chasing customers or anyone else for that matter. They’re supplying RAM to whoever is willing to pay the most for it, i.e., data centers and AI technology companies. They’re actively prioritizing those customers and refusing to supply the consumer market. That’s the exact opposite of competing for consumers.
If a new company enters the market and begins supplying RAM to meet consumer demand, there will be very little competition for those customers. In fact, consumers will buy from them hand over fist because there’s an underserved market waiting to be supplied.
I 100% understand what I’m reading, which is precisely why I’m commenting on it and explaining not only why this isn’t competition but also why OP fundamentally misunderstands what competition actually is.
Apparently, you’re also struggling with some rather basic, ninth-grade economics. 🤷
And the sheer confidence with which you proclaim such simple-minded nonsense is… incredible.