manquer

AWS (and others) have ladders of this was my point. GovCloud is just the one end of the this AWS also regions for Secret and Top Secret work which are reported to be air-gapped. There are probably programs beyond that where the customers are operating the stack fully on their own and so forth.

Meh rookie numbers you give me $250B too and keep doing that every year I will generate revenue $125B revenue easy. I only have to sell a dollar for 50 cents .

Same Amazon to develop AWS to profitable business spent only 30B in all capex (including e-commerce) over 12 years between 2003-15 .

The CFOs he is talking about are the enterprises who are spending big money on the tokens ; they are not seeing RoI ; not hyperscalers or frontier labs

Just a tad bit more ; it like saying either an event will happen or not so probability is 50%.

Your scenario is certainly possible, that doesn’t make both predictions equally (un)likely.

Azure (and AWS) offer Gov clouds, and probably on prem air-gapped deployment of their full stack of Fabric for that type of NEED security customers who can pay for it.

It is trade-off between risk and access/productivity with a cost dimension always.

Depending on your threat model you could go to typewriters /paper as some Russian department did famously few years back too.

Perhaps OP means to say it is a honeypot criminals create for us ...

Not the best analogy; water is famously not wet; it makes a surface wet is the common consensus ; wetness is being a property of a surface

Not exactly? Options vested is yours to exercise within typically a 60 day[1] window or they expire if you are no longer in the employ of the company.

Exercising your vested options is a taxable event[2] and requires you to upfront some cash to buy the stock depending on what price(and rounds) your options were issued at- this price usually is considerably less than enterprise value of the same share lets say it is $1 and FMV of $100 at the time of issue, however even just $1 for vested 500,000 options is still $500,000 now.

For this simple[4] scenario you need $500,000 immediately to exercise the options into stock before they expire and about ~$13.86M by April to own[5]all stock if ends up say trading at $200 you are worth $100M then.

There are all kinds of funds who would loan you the money or buy the stock off you now on the secondary market, but vested options does not mean owned stock, and selling quickly after exercise is much higher tax under some scenarios.

----

[1]Some companies have generous(relatively) terms ex-employees to exercise up-to 5-10years later; but it not default in the industry.

[2] This close to IPO that should be relatively small risk; i.e. if the company pulls IPO you still have to pay tax end of the year; if you exercise them.

[3] NSO/ISOs work quite differently, and options vest monthly in most corps and there are lot of creative structures out there; so cannot say how it would be for ANT employee specifically.

[4] Simple - because there usually more than singe 409A valuation and more than single set of options plan issued and plenty of other complex calculus only a finance expert would advise on.

[5] You could sell the shares to pay the ~14M-ish in tax but that could be disqualifying sale(2 year after grant, 1 year after exercise) for ISO meaning you will need to pay effectively 40M tax on your 100M holdings versus only ~$27M otherwise, so you would a take loan against the shares rather than sell to pay the tax.

Lower models typically use distilled outputs from higher model to improve .

all training runs have to at some level share the compute capacity ; while they have more than enough to run many large runs concurrently, they don’t have enough compute to run everything concurrently.

Only a GCP rep can give you an authoritative answer; but in my experience hyper scalers don’t promote services that not hosted on their platform .

From the press release this thread is about (emphasis mine) -

> backed by Google Cloud’s data governance and high-performance infrastructure

Yes; larger discounts with more commits, you also get some price guarantees on SKUs quite valuable these days and other benefits - like say premium support, architecture guidance, access to product teams and so forth.

Self-service retail buyers of cloud have access to some of these price advantages as well, 1-3 Year reservations(even paid monthly) are 40% cheaper of the bat after all. PAYG with fluctuating usage is quite more expensive than committed consumption for cloud.

You can use your preexisting committed spends for GCP on Open AI, i.e. if an enterprise 10M/year contracted spends for first party GCP services, now they can also use that on OAI models hosted on GCP.

Meaning they can swap out compute/storage spends on GCP to LLM model spend or use left over budget ( which would go waste anyway ) and so on . Any OpenAI sales by GCP teams would be considered against their quota typically in this type of arrangement [2]

This is normally not done to third party[1] marketplace services, Azure already does this for OpenAI, it helps drive some enterprise spends as it is from for fungible budgets or different approving authority internally in a org when it is not a new vendor, new budget etc.

----

[1] It is not too hard to get into these types of programs i.e. it not only for OpenAI level partners mid sized startups can also be part of these deals in marketplace, the requirement usually is minimum size and the partner having to prove/show that are spending that customer's revenue on the compute etc so money is going back to them, then AWS/Azure/GCP will consider an org for this type of program.

Given that GCP is hosting these models on their cloud and therefore OpenAI is spending a % of every dollar back on GCP for every token sold like this; it wouldn't have been too hard for OpenAI to got such a program even if they were a mid sized startup.

[2] Multiples maybe involved (also used to push some first party products) 1x would 1M in OAI sales counts as 1M in their Qtr/annual targets 0.5x would mean 500k and 5x means 5M quota would be retired for 1M in sales etc.

> very expensive

That is exactly my point, Human life supporting environments are great for tourism or experimental research missions where return on investment is not a critical factor.

Sending humans is not economically scalable option and cannot be ever cheaper than small carbon (or silicon based) based bots/organisms are the ones who can actually spread some version of life in the solar system and beyond.

---

This is same dynamics in fighter plane or submarines at smaller scale. We will get an interregnum period where the drones would be pitched that multiply/augment the ability of the pilot as in some proposed 6th generation designs.

This only serves mostly to get to the current crop of pilots and leadership to sign-up on a new program, 7th generation will be purely only drones. The full switch will happen when some rival Air Force will develop/skip to drone only 7th gen and the U.S. would have to catch up if not lead it. Submarines are also in the similar trajectory.