My account is from 2007ish and even cheaper. I just hope there won't ever be a problem with my yearly payment because obviously they won't reopen it on old terms.
Well, it's good business for them and for me. I can access books when it comes to my mind (not that often). They get the money. I would certainly never subscribe again at current rates.
Yikes, Mixpanel lost a OpenAI as a customer because of this.
> Trust, security, and privacy are foundational to our products, our organization, and our mission. We are committed to transparency, and are notifying all impacted customers and users. We also hold our partners and vendors accountable for the highest bar for security and privacy of their services. After reviewing this incident, OpenAI has terminated its use of Mixpanel.
I don't know about anyone else, but simply looking at this building makes me nervous. I can't imagine how it could remain structurally sound in high wind conditions. Those open-air floors just don't seem like they'd be enough to offset the lack of aerodynamics.
> As part of the arrangement, AMD issued a warrant that gives OpenAI the ability to buy up to 160 million shares of AMD for 1 cent each over the course of the chips deal. The warrant vests in tranches based on milestones that the two companies have agreed on.
This is money printing, just in the private sector. We know what happens when governments do it, and it's not good.
You're right. It's not really money printing, at least not directly. Only banks can print money.
What these recent deals do is inflate asset prices by making (future) revenues appear higher or perhaps just more certain than they really are.
Assets can be used as collateral for loans. If someone were to use their AMD shares as collateral for a loan at a commercial bank (not a margin loan), that would be money printing and you could print more of it today than before the deal was announced.
Not the same, since if you buy Bitcoin, you don't have partial ownership of the machines used to mine and also these machines being used for a singular purpose which you cannot change.
AMD issues new shares and gets a penny (read: effectively zero) back for them.
ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL this means everyone holding AMD has 10% of their equity/value taken away and handed to OpenAI.
But all else is not equal. OpenAI only gets the shares if they buy AMD GPUs. The intent is that this offsets the dilution by making AMD overall more valuable. (This is why the stock price jumped on the announcement) It's a GPU subsidy paid for by AMD's shareholders rather than AMD itself.
The real risk is that this further entangles AMD in the AI bubble. OpenAI already has enormous datacenter construction obligations. The likelihood of them failing to meet these new obligations, and thus this deal falling through or otherwise not materialising, is pretty high. If the AI bubble goes *POP*, AMD will be hurting a lot more than before this deal.
Percentage math doesn't quite work that way. (130% * 90% for gaining 30% and then giving away 10% of that, is 117% not 120%)
But yes. That's the intent.
The "problem" is that OpenAI doesn't have any of the shares yet, and it's unclear how much they actually will get. Right now AMD shareholders have the full +30% gain with none of the loss. But will the +30% gain be wiped out on the news OpenAI won't be buying as many AMD GPUs? Only time can tell.
The first 0.1% of shareholders to sell would get the full +30%, then the next 0.1% would get ~28%, then the next... and by the time you got down to the last of the initial shareholders trying to liquidate, the price would likely be pennies on the dollar.
This is not value, but hot air.
The value these things represent is based almost entirely on the myth/hype + 401k index fund growth + inflation expectations at this point.
If you don't get dividends or voting power from your shares, all you have left is liquidation rights in the event of a bankruptcy. So, the shares are really worth their share of ~whatever AMD's assets are worth in a bankruptcy.
But, because we trade them in public markets, they're immediately worth whatever someone else will pay. And that's basically much more tethered to myth (and consistent 401k index fund growth + inflation expectations) than to fundamentals at this point.
Right now, 401k funds are buying AMD at this higher share price, with zero due diligence!
So, if growth stops / if job losses explode, then 401k contributions slow down (or reverse!), then markets fall, then margin calls happen, then markets fall more, more job losses...
There's a lot of cash sloshing around in the system from all the 2020s money printing, and there's a perma-buy-the-dip mentality that has come out of this extreme bull market (bubble market), so there is quite some extra resilience; but, the coyote is really going to have a reckoning once it finally looks down...
The shares haven't been issued yet, so there isn't any dilution. Equity holders could sell their holdings now and benefit, because when OAI exercises the option and gets 160m shares for peanuts, they will sell those shares ASAP to bring in cash to pay for their orders of AMD chips.
It isn’t printing money (money supply was not increased, and no one has access to more money due to the contract signed between the two parties), but I assume it makes the poster feel good to be outraged and express it by writing something like that.
AMD's valuation increased by over 30% this morning, so to say no one has access to more money because of this news is untrue.
I'm not outraged at all, I just think this sort of bizarre financial engineering is not a good sign. If the ROI was so obvious, why not, for example, simply issue bonds and buy AMD stock on the open market?
> and no one has access to more money due to the contract signed between the two parties
If a third party decides to pay a higher price for a publicly listed share because of the news of this contract, that is not printing money. The buyer of the shares loses money, the seller gains it, for a net change of zero in money supply.
If OAI issued bonds, they'd be carrying all the risk. With these deals with Microsoft, Nvidia and now AMD, they're shifting some of that risk to powerful players in the "too big to let fail" category.
Do you recall what “people familiar with finance” did with CDOs and mortgage-backed securities during the financial crisis? That didn’t work out so well either, despite all parties being aware of the risks.
It bears repeating my original question: if the risks are so minor, why is OpenAI simply not issuing bonds and buying AMD stock with the proceeds?
I didn’t claim the risks are minor, I am just arguing against the notion of it being “printing money”, as if they have the powers of the Treasury.
> Do you recall what “people familiar with finance” did with CDOs and mortgage-backed securities during the financial crisis? That didn’t work out so well either, despite all parties being aware of the risks.
There was straight up fraud involved in the underwriting for the mortgages where verification (or rather underwriting itself) was not being done.
This deal is a transparent bet on an outcome with no deceived party.
It is dilution. 160 million shares of AMD for 1 cent will be added. The idea is that the value increase of the remaining shares enabled by the OpenAI cooperation will be stronger than the decrease caused by dilution.
It's not money printing because shares are not classified as money in economics. Money is used for transactions while shares primary purpose is not transactions.
The big difference is that the dot-com bubble coincided with low interest rates, whereas interest rates increased sharply after COVID ended, which was right when AI was taking off.
It's fairly trivial to write code that can autogenerate hundreds or even thousands of AI-generated videos using Veo 3 with individual characters to push any narrative you'd like and push to Instagram or TikTok.
That's way scarier to me than a newspaper having a bias, or someone with an audience publishing a controversial blog post.
I love what the Go team is shipping on this front, but I'd love to hear from folks who actively use these features in production.
Between OTEL, Datadog, Google Cloud, and umpteen other distributed tracing offerings, I don't quite understand how this fits in. I'd love there to be a drop-in approach to using this in my existing Google Cloud Run application, but as far as I understand I'd need to figure out some way to collect the traces, save them somewhere (ostensibly GCS?) and then download them when I need to diagnose an issue.
Seems like a lot of work, and just another thing to maintain.
I feel the same. I can't quite tell where this fits in, in a production context.
I suppose the value proposition might be that it's all built-in, meaning there's no events to publish over the network nor any OTEL collectors to deploy. This is just a file on the host that you can read and use go's built-in trace tool to examine. In that way, I guess it's simply like any log file, but enriched with trace data and configured to only contain only the traces you're interested in.
reply