Rant incoming. I know it's bad form to critique anything but the content... but I wish the story wasn't padded with those bland GenAI eyesores of an image. It's a dumb kneejerk reaction I observe in myself, but the presence of generated graphics anywhere immediately turn me off.
GenAI padded blog post? Guess your content isn't interesting enough. GenAI album cover? Artist must be equally lazy at making music. GenAI graphics on some flyer someone hands me? Please, could have just slapped nothing but text on there & let your content, whatever it is, do the talking.
I know it's there to "make things pop" or whatever but I'm so put off by the ubiquitous blandness, the samey high contrasts, subtle artifacts... Milking peoples' attention is the new smoking, or at least it should be, IMO. Especially if it's done in the most aggravatingly bland style, that of the GenAI image generator.
> Wrappers rely on OpenAI. OpenAI relies on Microsoft. Microsoft needs NVIDIA. NVIDIA owns the chips that power it all
So this is the model that investors see. The reality is quite different. People and orgs are not stupid and want to avoid vendor lock-in.
So in reality:
* Wrapper don't only rely on OpenAI. In fact, in order to be competitive, they have to avoid OpenAI because it's terribly expensive. If they can get away with other models, the savings can be enormous as some of these can be 10x cheaper.
* Local models are a thing. You don't need proprietary models and API calls at all for certain uses. And these models get better and better each year.
* Nvidia is still the dominant player and this won't change in the next years but AMD is really making huge progress here. I don't mention TPUs as they seem to be much Google-specific.
* Microsoft is not in any special position here - I was implementing OpenAI API integrations with various API gateways and it's by no means something related to Azure only.
* OpenAI's business model is based on faith at this moment. This was debated ad nauseam so it makes no sense to repeat all arguments here but the fact is that they used to be the only one game in town, then the leader, and now are neither, but still claim to be.
We might well be at the cusp of a huge bubble caused by investor hubris, but this article hasn’t convinced me.
The difference between the stated podcast app and the dot com bubble is that one is making serious revenue at almost 100% profit, whereas one did not even have a revenue model.
Also I think everyone knows at this point that foundation models are a commodity and not a particularly profitable business.
What does this guy look at on Instagram to get a feed like that?
It sounds like he sees what he does because that is all he looks for.
> And they’re charging 50–100/month to do what anyone could replicate for pennies. It’s not just overpriced — it’s dishonest. The entire business model relies on the user not knowing how simple it really is.
But this is general SaaS model. Wrap thing that are being done by lower level software such as FFmpeg and expose them in a nice GUI ready for use by people who are not technical.
So what can change in the example above is the amount of markup going down, not the SaaS service going away entirely.
Openai owns the intelligence until it doesnt, and the open source model is good enough
Not gonna sign up for a Medium account just to read this
Whilst I liked some of the article, I got very bored with the structure and after about half way, I skimmmed it.
If you are going to write about AI companies going to be extinct next year, could you please write it without the use of AI? It turned very formulaic.
And the fact it was calling something a scam because it was packaged up? That’s the same as anything that’s packaged - may as well buy 6 apples and take home to wash/cut rather than the prepackaged/cut ones.
Some thought provoking ideas though - spoiling by the link to get early access to a local AI