Considering Apple's support and product cycle. You are looking at a Billion devices supporting JPEG XL between now and end of next year. It might be low in percentage, but it is still a substantial number.
I wrote below in 2022 on HN [1] when everyone was panicking about AWS growth slowing down.
* >>Amazon said Thursday that revenue growth in its cloud-computing unit slowed in the third quarter to 27.5%.*
27.5%. It is lower that their previous 33% growth over the past few years, but at the current size of AWS growing 27.5% is still ridiculously good. To put this in perspective, if AWS continues to grow at 33% in 2022 and 2023. Then the whole 2023 33% growth alone, would equal to the size of the entire AWS in 2018. It is not the first time Amazon said they are limited by how fast they are building out Datacenter and getting hardware resources ready.
That was in 2022. They nearly double their 2018 size alone in a single year.
I don't understand back then. I still can't get my head around it now. With or without AI. With AI the number and scale just grows beyond my imagination. CPU power per socket or per Rack have increased every single year. What used to take 10 racks could now be replaced by 1. I would have expected slowly replacing old Rack to newer ones would have been enough with slower Datacenter growth. That is not to mention software have gotten faster and efficient over the years. JVM, PHP, Ruby, C, Database etc over the past 10 - 15 years.
Instead we keep growing, not only that; AI have shown they seems to have infinite appetite for computing resources. I know this is classic Jevons Paradox but the scale [2]. It is mind boggling numbers.
[2] I remember the last time I had scale issues was I can't compute in my head how Apple will be a trillion dollar company by 2020. That was written on Appleinsider in ~2012. We now have multiple trillions dollar companies. The TAM of some of these market continue to amaze me.
AI's appetite for computation scales with the willingness of their funders to provide heavily discounted tokens to the general public.
The basic play here is to get companies to fire people and adapt internal processes to the current heavily subsidized AI farms, and then jack the rates once the switching costs become untenable ... particularly if they can get a huge percentage of human programmers to quit the industry.
This is effectively "dumping" in the economic sense.
With some work on crypto many people could be a trillionaire on paper. Whether it translate to actual wealth and liquidity is another matter. We are talking about P/E of 300 / P/S of close to 100 for Tesla and SpaceX.
>When exactly are the upsides going to hit?
A lot of people take Moore's law, or technology improvement as granted. It will always come. It will always become cheaper. But none of that is true. Massive R&D is required along with ROI.
The AI Boom pushed a lot of technology forward by at least 2 - 3 years or 1 cycle. What normally would have taken 10 years to happen is now getting close to 5 years. We were suppose to stagnate or slow down with 3nm and 2nm, we are now rushing to push through everything from interconnect, smaller transistor and massive increase in Foundry capacity. PCI-Express 8.0, Nvidia Photonics, DRAM Improvement, HBM, HBF, even capacitor, immersive cooling. I don't even record the last time we had such a massive shift and changes in hardware technology. Even the start of smartphone era wasn't like this as majority of its start was picking on lower end PC components. Instead the AI is pushing the frontier hardware technology. With multiple trillion companies, insane appetite from market. We are basically saying we have Trillions to spend over the next 5 years. Give me everything you have got.
Sure would be nice if we got to see any of that, instead of it all going solely to resource guzzling data centres selling opaque models whilst simultaneously destroying the pricing for local hardware!
We are only 1 to 2 year into a cycle and we expect a lot of things to happen. Even the business decisions of things were decided before the cycle happened, as if they are fortune teller or God, the hardware lead time would meant it will be next year at best before we see results. And Nvidia has already moved at a faster pace than most imagined. Latest GPU R&D are now fully amortised on the AI server front. GPU now move to leading edge node faster than before and iterate on a shorter cycle. I have yet to read a single comments on either HN, Reddit or wider internet that appreciate this.
And as to NAND and DRAM, which most people are concern. We only need a few companies to commit to long term ( 3 - 5 years ) agreement on pricing and quantity, DRAM and NAND will increase supply or new fabs accordingly. This isn't new and is exactly what Apple did with iPod. But no companies wants to do that, as they all want lowest price and little commitment, while foundry don't want to bare the risk of new fab and over supply in the long term. This is just classic commodity supply and demand scenario.
On a simpler terms, no one asked why Toilet paper companies aren't putting up more factory just to output more paper rolls during COVID. And If you need 5 to 10 years just to earn back the cost of additional supply line, why risk that?
Please show sources. Maybe no one appreciates it because it's only rumors spread by enterprises massively profiting from such rumors?
And about your toilet paper analogy: Every producer tried everything to improve output. You cannot just let your machines run faster. You also need input materials, workers and logistics to scale accordingly, which is often not possible.
> We are basically saying we have Trillions to spend over the next 5 years. Give me everything you have got.
We are saying AI companies have trillions to spend over the next 5 years on infrastructure, based on servicing a hypothetical TAM that includes large amounts of workers who it also expects to displace.
> The AI Boom pushed a lot of technology forward by at least 2 - 3 years or 1 cycle.
Untrue. Technology has been evolving perfectly fine for the last 50 years. If anything it has slowed down lately due to getting close to the physical limits - which were reached without any AI whatsoever. We were getting insane gains in clock speed and memory capacity some 20 odd years ago, it's not the case any more.
> We are basically saying we have Trillions to spend over the next 5 years.
No we don't, inflation tells you that loud and clear. If the Fed wanted to really take care of the raging (but under-reported) inflation, they'd have to raise interest rates a lot more but that would kill the pump-up operation of the AI market bubble. So the Fed is sitting on their hands.
> Give me everything you have got.
That figures. I'm pretty sure you're never going to say "We're giving you everything we've got". The asset pump works only one way - up, trickle down is for losers. You see, the trillionares aren't waiting for the bright future, they're grabbing all they can right now, only the peons are forced to "give everything they've got" while on a steady diet of hallucinations which can never materialize.
I wish there was a case where I find Evans is wrong. As far as my memory served me, I failed to record a single one.
I disagree that Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google are "well" behind. If anything the frontier model advantage seems to be at best 6 - 9 months. And that the Chinese model are all doing well.
One of Steve Jobs's line, "It is a feature, not a product." Even if Apple were a generation behind or 1 year behind frontier model. The advantage of default is enough to hold a lot of its user.
To put it simply, even if OpenAI or Anthropic were better, there is zero chances they would topple Apple in hardware sales, user or ecosystem. On the other hand, even if Apple's AI were 6 - 9 months or a generation behind, most user would settle for it and damage OpenAI / Anthropic.
Just top of my head (and I don't even follow his takes that closely), just check his takes on Magic Leap which he consistently promoted using quite dramatic langauge (along with the entire AR space) and check how it panned out.
> On the other hand, even if Apple's AI were 6 - 9 months or a generation behind,
Do you mean Google's AI with Apple wrappers? Apple's in-house AI is further behind Google, amd very far from the frontier according to your ranking. IMO, Google is on the frontier - I recall Altman calling for an OpenAI all-hands-on deck when Gemini was released because of how good it was compared to ChatGPT. I also suspect Google has the lowest operating expenses due to scale, experience and luck/planning (TPUs), there will come a time when AI investments will slow down, and the cost of revenue will become more important.
Even their own employees get frustrated if they can't use Claude or Codex. 6-9 months is a big difference and I think it's closer to 9 than 6. And never mind the harness etc are also many months behind.
This is just wishful thinking. I am sure someone from gossip media will also find Apple employees who are ready to leave job if Apple disallows Claude usage.
If anything Apple should notice it is Anthropic has got a really good marketing team and it would be no shame if they pick a trick or two from them.
I mean my electric Fan and standing lamp are both powered by USB-C.
There are things that shouldn't be powered by USB-C. But there are plenty of sub 100W consumer electronics devices that really should be USB-C. I waited years before Panasonic released their lamdash shavers using USB-C.
>Is anyone else as stunned as I am by how many posters on tech websites have suddenly gone full anti-free-internet and embracing the police state?
There is certainly an angle where people are fed up with the current state of things.
But generally speaking, the overall HN has been trending towards anti-free-internet and embracing the police state for a long time. I am pretty sure people can run an LLM on HN comments over the years.
I don't think it has to do with optimism has faded. Eternal September means Younger generation new to HN, It is highly likely if we were to do a poll, people under 40, lower age group would increasingly support Anti-Free Internet. This mentality also aligns well with majority of their political believe.
Not at all. WASM is a repudiation of the thesis, not a confirmation.
The thesis is that javascript-compatible source will be the substrate of the future. A javascript engine, though one highly optimized to efficiently interpret a compatible subset, is a potential universal platform of the future despite generic javascript being a terrible substrate.
WASM fundamentally rejects this by creating a new javascript-incompatible substrate that is actually designed to be a low level target. Claiming WASM is confirmation of the thesis makes as much sense as claiming that a future where everybody has a Rust interpreter in the browser is confirmation of the thesis.
If you are arguing that, then you are just arguing that web browsers will run code in some form in some language as they already do. As the video is clearly discussing a “surprising” possible future, it makes little sense for it to be consistent with literally business as usual and literally every possible future.
WASM is literally a direct replacement for asm.js. In fact, for a long time emscripten supported both simultaneously - both as outputs from the same tool chain.
They have a lot in common. So it's not at all wrong to say WASM fulfills the prophecy. It's an iteration of the concept that resulted in JS as a compile target and later asm.js.
Not the parent, but: ChromeOS isn't what I'd call a web-based OS. It supports Android apps, and that's how you get a lot of things that don't have web versions. Not much different from how Ubuntu can run Chrome and also supports native apps.
Personally, I dont consider chromeos wheb thinking about operating systems because it's not a real os, its a toy released by a shady advertising company. (Same as android.)
I flagged it because it looked like a low-effort vibe-coded cash-grab app that doesn’t do anything novel that Pages doesn’t, and the submitter has zero other history (reinforcing it’s a cash-grab).
The OP not responding to any of the claims also reinforces this.
reply