Being sarcastic here. The usual argument everyone brings up "inference is extremely profitable, checkmate AI skeptics!" while dismissing the black hole that is training.
> while dismissing the black hole that is training
True, but the point the "subsidized!" people are convinced of is that for each generated token Anthropic is losing money, when it's exactly the other way around.
Sort of? They have “cost of revenue” which is compute and salaries (and whatever) for serving inference, then “research and development” which is cost of compute and salaries for training, then “sales and marketing”, then “operations”. R&D is like half the expenses.
Being sarcastic here. The usual argument everyone brings up "inference is extremely profitable, checkmate AI skeptics!" while dismissing the black hole that is training.
> while dismissing the black hole that is training
True, but the point the "subsidized!" people are convinced of is that for each generated token Anthropic is losing money, when it's exactly the other way around.
Are these inference & training profitability numbers broken out in the S1?
Sort of? They have “cost of revenue” which is compute and salaries (and whatever) for serving inference, then “research and development” which is cost of compute and salaries for training, then “sales and marketing”, then “operations”. R&D is like half the expenses.
Are they doing the standard SV thing of pretending employee stock comp is free?