Comment

Comment by coderbants

I think the lifecycle for these chips could stretch far longer. If you're offering these models on a two year lifecycle, then you'd be able to stand up your top tier (wouldn't need to be frontier) at high speed. Run (for example) Kimi K3 on it and give it a brand name:

AcmeAI Carbon

Market it as your premier (only) model at high throughput. Two years later you stand up MSICs for the new state of the art with entirely new hardware, your lineup becomes:

AcmeAI Nitrogen (top tier) AcmeAI Carbon (mid tier)

If you just kept pushing the same model down your pricing tier over time you could still extract a lot of value from an old model, even years after it's been set in stone. Working on brand new code/frameworks? Pay to use the newest model. Working on legacy code? Use the lower tier models that will already know your legacy frameworks, pay far less and still get massive throughput. I've worked on a lot of government projects that this would be absolutely brilliant for.

The other side of this is that agent harnesses are NOT set in stone, so even a legacy model with a knowledge cut-off that's years out of date can likely still be helped quite a bit by harness and fetch behaviours that are still developing rapidly. Especially at this kind of throughput.

parent coderbants 2 months ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton