OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is in talks with investors, including from the United Arab Emirates, to raise between $5 trillion to $7 trillion in funding. The goal, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal, is to increase the world’s chip manufacturing capacity and enhance AI capabilities.

The fundraising efforts are part of a broader strategy to address OpenAI’s growth constraints, particularly the scarcity of AI chips needed for training large language models like ChatGPT.

Altman’s proposal is said to include forming a partnership with investors, chip manufacturers, and power providers to finance the construction of chip foundries, which would then be operated by the chip manufacturers.

184 points
*

That’s fairly bold to ask for ~6% of the total world economy as well as a sizable chunk of the world’s energy.

permalink
report
reply
57 points

I was about to ask for the other 94%…

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

.000000001 percent of that…. Please

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

so… fifty bucks?

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

See now, they need to ask for more like 25% of the total world economy. That way what they actually want is gonna seem like a great deal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-29 points

AI will double the world’s economy so they’re basically giving us an extra 94% for free.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

The world economy cannot double without destroying the planet’s ability to sustain us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

inagine it like putting the middle classes wealth in a blender.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

But instead of a delicious smoothie, it makes that toxic dust like the will it blend videos.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That’s called inflation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

$7,000,000,000,000? It’s a good thing we won’t tax it ever at all in any capacity! Not while there’s Single Mothers overdrawn on their Bank Accounts! #SaveTheTrillionaires!

permalink
report
reply
-14 points

I get the joke/point that you’re making, but usually a company’s investment into research, development, expansion, etc is tax exempt. Hopefully even the most serious critics of our current capatalist economy would agree that these types of investments should be tax exempt, because it means paying more salaries or purchasing goods and services from other companies, which again means more salaries. Generally, these aren’t c-level salaries either because usually the c-suite is not producing the goods and services required.

If those investments then net a huge profit that goes to a few individuals, then yes, those profits should be taxed, unavoidably and fairly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

If a company uses “b” or “t” in it’s financial numbers, then the companies should have the piss taxed out of them. There is no justifiable reason for numbers that large to be tax free in literally any context.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Unless they are being donated to good causes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The theory is solid, but in reality there’s often abuse of these laws and suddenly you have Hollywood Accounting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Can my research into getting rich be tax exempt, too? It’s not like these are going to become public knowledge. This fucker’s going to patent everything and keep anyone else from using it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Patenting actual inventions is absolutely necessary for industrial research to be viable. Being a patent troll is the problem. The US patent office needs to be expanded, probably doubled, to address the issue. I don’t know how well equipped other nation’s patent offices are.

Patents require the disclosure of the invention so that it can be copied by others after 20 years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

a company’s investment into research, development, expansion, etc is tax exempt. Hopefully even the most serious critics of our current capatalist economy would agree that these types of investments should be tax exempt

That’s a bunch of nonsense. Taxes apply to INCOME, so any expenses are automatically tax exempt.

it means paying more salaries or purchasing goods and services from other companies, which again means more salaries.

Nope. Companies expanding AI in order to replace workers or at the very least increase productivity without increasing wages does not in any way, shape or form mean “more salaries”.

Generally, these aren’t c-level salaries either because usually the c-suite is not producing the goods and services required.

Bullshit. It’s true that the C-suite doesn’t produce anything, but they’re the first to get a raise when things go well and the last to be fired (and even then, usually with a golden parachute equivalent to several years’ pay of the average worker) when things go less well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Companies don’t have income, they have revenue and profits. Revenue minus Costs (which include salaries, investments, materials, etc) equals Profits. The costs get detailed into different buckets which tracks investments into the company itself versus expenses that the company needs to pay to continue operating. An important number is the return on investments (ROI). A high enough ROI means the company makes more from investing in itself than it would from using the money for any other purpose.

I wasn’t talking specifically about an AI company, but companies in general. The investment in AI discussed in the original article is not about immediately developing additional AI programs, but rather about expanding the production of semiconductor manufacturing to meet the needs of chips for AI. A reasonable argument could be made that this will eventually eliminate jobs. Counter arguments would likely point out that the nature of jobs would change. Personally, I think that AI is going to become a larger part of our society and we need to think about the ways that we need to react to that. It likely means investing in better education, because some of the first jobs to go will be jobs which require low intellectual contributions. I don’t think it will replace jobs which require a great degree of physical manipulation however, because robotics are simply not at that level yet.

Regarding your point about c-suite raises, I addressed this very point in the last paragraph of my prior comment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Nobody seems to recognize that madness is not in numbers, but in people.

permalink
report
reply
60 points

Could that level of investment ever be recouped in any other manner than by replacing vast numbers of workers and their salaries?

permalink
report
reply
25 points

That’s my question; presumably the people in charge of that much wealth aren’t total fools and will be wanting to see some actual numbers and a business case as to how they will see a return, not just platitudes and enthusiasm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

That’s how productivity growth is achieved, a smaller amount of workers do the same task.

Or course, the created wealth is again invested back eventually and new products/services require new jobs.

For example, right now we have some of the highest labor participation in years, despite rising productivity

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

yeah and productivity increase has decoupled from wage in 1980, while productivity rises wages stay the same - why should anyone who’s not a multimillionaire find that acceptable?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why would anyone know this fact and attack productivity increases rather than its being decoupled from wages?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Yes, think about how computers had multiplicative effect on productivity. The same may be possible with AI.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Well, see, if we grind down 8 billion people into a nourishing slurry with a shelf life of a century, that should be worth at least $1000 a person, with inflation. That’s a 50% profit on your investment!

permalink
report
parent
reply
134 points

The fundraising efforts are part of a broader strategy to address OpenAI’s growth constraints,

see…we just can’t grow without TRILLIONS OF FUCKING DOLLARS

permalink
report
reply
62 points

STOP CONSTRAINING ME

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

AM I BEING CONSTRAINED? OR AM I FREE TO GO?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

HELP HELP I’M BEING REPRESSED

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

i have a business case to become the major player in the chip industry: buy the planet’s economy

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Feels a bit like that paperclip sim

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

maybe just “they” can’t.

probably a bad idea to put those with already too many recource usage, who are living on the cost of society for uncountable generations, in positions to decide anything. maybe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Between this and saying they couldn’t operate if they fairly paid authors, I’m getting the feeling that Altman might be as talented of a CEO as Spez and Musk.

That is – if anyone else was making decisions, the companies would be vastly more successful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If a leap in world computing capacity is really what’s needed here then it is a tall order. Crypto has been sucking up an increasing share of that in recent years and will probably continue to do so as long as people love money and are idiots. Plus the geopolitics around Taiwan, China, annd the US are a problem as well. I’m not sure how you solve all that even with 5 trillion.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 557K

    Comments