You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
2 points

please explain to us how you think having less, or more, subscribers would make this profitable

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah, the tweet clearly says that the subscribers they have are using it more than they expected, which is costing them more than $200 per month per subscriber just to run it.

I could see an argument for an economy of scales kind of situation where adding more users would offset the cost per user, but it seems like here that would just increase their overhead, making the problem worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

LLM inference can be batched, reducing the cost per request. If you have too few customers, you can’t fill the optimal batch size.

That said, the optimal batch size on today’s hardware is not big (<20). I would be very very surprised if they couldn’t fill it for any few-seconds window.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

i would swear that in an earlier version of this message the optimal batch size was estimated to be as large as twenty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

yep, original is still visible on mastodon

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

this sounds like an attempt to demand others disprove the assertion that they’re losing money, in a discussion of an article about Sam saying they’re losing money

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

What? I’m not doubting what he said. Just surprised. Look at this. I really hope Sam IPO his company so I can short it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

TechTakes

!techtakes@awful.systems

Create post

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here’s the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

Community stats

  • 1.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 548

    Posts

  • 12K

    Comments

Community moderators