No investment advice. Weak opinions, strongly held. Specialize in widget making. West coast born and raised
Joined January 2022
- Tweets1.2K
- Following655
- Followers3.7K
- Likes601
Pinned Tweet
1/ A lot of bearishness on open-weights commoditizing frontier labs alongside token budget cuts, which then impacts semis. There is a wall of worry of OAI / ANT's NNARR $ over the near term. My (more bullish) views on 1) token optimization, 2) open-weights, 3) the real LT opt
65% still > 40%
Removing AI natives? So don't target the fasting growing customer segment?
And you have how much SBC relative to your non-GAAP margins?
I say this as somebody long $SNOW. But not a good look
release all the numbers.
does 80% yoy become 65% when you remove passthru inference?
what does it become when you remove ai natives?
and how much of it is from one time software license --> service transition?
fcf, RPO, cRPO?
op margin non-gaap, gaap? dilution?
curious ppls want to know
ps: @alighodsi happy for your success. the world is big and life long.
teapaw.org/bhorowitz/status/21150…
Idk feel like we’re now here. AI momentum back up driven by 1) ANT S-1 that was better than feared, 2) good fundamentals across CSPs, 3) neocloud yields topping. Idk how long we go up for but sentiment too neg / positioning too light. Pain trade higher now post de-grossing
My gross / net is the lowest it’s been in years. But y’all are too bearish and missing the forest for the trees. Think about what has happened over last 12 months. The next 12 months will be many times crazier. Quarterly rev bogeys is fucking stupid at this stage. Pls sell pls
Let me guess. Everybody is gonna freak out and trade down into midterms….positioning going to get too negative….midterms will be better than feared and ANT will re-accelerate NNARR in Q4 given less META churn, less distillation headwind, and Opus 5.5 gaining share back. We rip
This whole economy is contingent on VCs doing math. We’re fucked
OPENAI'S ANNUALIZED REVENUE NEARS $50B, BELOW EARLIER $70B REPORTS: FT
OpenAI recently told investors its annualized revenue was approaching $50B at the end of September, roughly $20B below the figure widely reported last month.
The discrepancy reportedly stems from differences in how OpenAI and Anthropic calculate revenue. Anthropic includes sales through cloud partners such as AWS and Google Cloud, while OpenAI does not.
Investors had attempted to adjust OpenAI's figures to make them comparable with Anthropic's, contributing to the previously reported $70B estimate.
OpenAI declined to comment.
Source: Financial Times.
Can’t wait for everyone to get short on $META / $MSFT tough comps as spend ramped in H1 just to flip long on easy comp / churn in H2. Sick
$META & MICROSOFT ARE CUTTING INTERNAL CLAUDE USE AS THEY PUSH THEIR OWN AI TOOLS
Meta and $MSFT, two major Anthropic customers, are reducing employee use of Claude, according to The Information.
Microsoft had been on pace to spend at least $1B annually on internal Anthropic usage earlier this year, but has since cut that level by more than one-third.
At Meta, Claude Code users have roughly halved to ~30,000 from ~60,000 earlier this year.
Meanwhile:
MetaCode users: 30,000+
Muse Code users: 6,000+
Meta still spent more than $105M on Claude Code over a recent 28-day period.
Source: The Information
PM: Why did your PnL suck
Analyst: I purposely slowed down so I can focus on culture and alignment. Pacing is important because unresponsible PnL generation makes me look too much like a big swinging dick. Otherwise, there is >10% chance my coworkers will exterminate me
Last month I wrote about how we can build a positive and safe future for everyone: meta.com/thefutureisforevery…
Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and the ability to take its own actions to ensure that happens.
The reality is:
- People won't want to use agents that are misaligned with them and that don't do what they ask, so labs have a strong natural incentive to make their models more aligned.
There is a lot of debate about slowing progress on capabilities until alignment catches up. My view is that trust and alignment are quickly becoming the most important capabilities that will differentiate agents and models. Any lab that doesn't focus on alignment will fall behind.
- Labs face significant liability if their models cause harm, so they have a strong incentive to prevent this as well.
Meta delayed shipping Muse for several months to focus on safety and security. We didn't call for everyone else to do this before we would. We just did it as part of our day-to-day work because it was clearly the right thing for people and for us. I'm proud of the security foundations we've built.
- Engaging independent evaluators and advisors is industry best practice. MSL already does this today in several areas because it helps produce better work. Other labs can just do this too. In general, it would be helpful for there to be a larger and more diverse ecosystem of evaluators.
- Committing the significant majority of compute towards serving people rather than racing towards recursive self-improvement is one of the best ways to ensure we develop this technology safely. Meta has made this commitment and other labs can do this as well.
I believe the key to building a positive future for everyone is maintaining the right balance of power. This is within our power to do.
Labs are telling you they are willing to slow down progress because the gap between frontier intelligence and enterprise readiness / security is only widening (and accelerating). We're about to see the biggest security upgrade cycle since COVID
