Or Infamous at this rate, this is vulgar populism at it's core.
LinkIs this anti-science? Anti-ecnomics? I've already points the way he treats his other technocritics.
"I want to clarify that I never claimed that OpenAI is a profitable business, or even has a good or sustainable business model, but simply that this data falsifies a big claim that Zitron has repeatedly made. He seems to have moved the goal posts to claiming that training costs should count toward the gross margins, but that is a totally different argument.
If you make money from your customers on average, you can grow your way to recouping even very high fixed costs. If you instead lose money from the typical customer, as Zitron repeatedly contended, then growing more will make you run out of money faster. This is an incredibly important distinction, and getting it wrong for so long (in the face of reporting from the Information, which Zitron favourably cites elsewhere, as well as independent estimates)
is frankly disqualifying for a commentator on AI industry economics."
The comments on that is really what this has become, neither critic or booster/hyper
Why do you debate them? Because no, That's why. Look at the comments.
This has escaped sensible discussion and the ruination of organization within disorganization separation of populism and elitism of ideas inter-connect and naïve noble-savage can happen, yet with that. Tech being art in the aristolian sense, that we have to inquire if these are any serious matter or another vulgar critic of crassness to discard with Bull**** jobs that of socioeconomic to regard.