this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
594 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

85212 readers
4072 users here now

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


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 37 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Honestly Google is likely to beat openAI and Anthropic as things are.

OpenAI and Anthropic have to buy/rent their hardware from Nvidia, while Google is making their own TPU hardware. Google's hardware costs on AI is way lower, every dollar they spend on it goes a lot farther.

And unlike the other two, they're already a profitable company. They're making record profits right now. They don't have a desperate need to figure out how to make back billions on their AI models, they can just keep offering Gemini at a comparatively cheap price and wait for anthropic and open AI to bankrupt themselves.

[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 2 points 42 minutes ago* (last edited 26 minutes ago)

That's definitely costing them more than running it on their own hardware, but it doesn't mean AI is costing them more than the AI startups. Anthropic for example is already paying SpaceX 1.25 Billion a month for compute, and has agreed to pay Google 200Billion oflcer the next 5 years for access to Google's compute and TPU chips.

Google's deal with xAI specifically lets them terminate the deal with 90 days notice after the end of the year. Google is also investing heavily in building new data centers with their hardware. I'm assuming this deal means they've eclipsed their current TPU capacity, and are just looking for a short term bandaid until they can catch up with their new constructions.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Anthropic is doing the same too. SpaceX over here providing the shovels and pans for the modern day gold rush, sheesh.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I guess google's announcement of renting xai compute could have been simply for show to boost SpaceX ipo.

[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 hours ago

They have big plans to build more data centers for themselves, so they definitely want more compute than the have access to right now. But even if they're paying more to rent xai compute, they're still paying less overall for hardware/access than their direct AI competition.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

Plus they have a hook with the common folk, the phone steers you toward Gemini (Android phones, obviously, and Apple currently partners with Google for Gemini for iPhone...).

For Claude and OpenAI, you have to explicitly want to go out of your way to use them, or use them indirectly through another service that has a hook.

Claude seems to have some software developers explicitly preferring them, though a alot of the corporate money is on Microsoft and Microsoft leveraged Visual Studio and Github to become the business-friendly frontend, and sure, you can use Anthropic models too... Though Microsoft ultimately has control of what is reasonably available and how much each one costs. Anthropic has a shot but I could see Microsoft pivot to really mess with Anthropic. The one gap in Microsoft strategy is the "native AI" workflow where Claude Code has won hearts and minds, but it uses massively more tokens for frankly marginal or sometimes negative value compared to a more curated use in-editor.

OpenAI I see as the most exposed. Lot's of data showing they are suffering from people being over the fad of going out of their way to use ChatGPT, especially since their phones have started embracing 'default' Chatbot. Software developers that are inclined to use LLM are also inclined to be pretty dismissive of anything other than either Anthropic or open weight models, depending on their inclination. Also Altman seemed the most agressive in committing to spending money they didn't have, though all of them exhibit this to some extent.

I predict Microsoft ultimately pivots to in-house models and convinces the businesses to go that way. Apple may continue with Gemini or roll their own eventually. Anthropic currently has the stronger position between OpenAI and them, but I think you are right that both have risk of just being left behind.

[–] SunshineJogger@feddit.org 8 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

I really really really don't want evil corporation Google to dominate even more.

I prefer plailny greedy corporations over evil ones

[–] ChromaticMan@lemmy.world 16 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

OpenAI and Anthropic aren’t less evil than Google.

[–] SunshineJogger@feddit.org 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

They aren't great, though I do think Google is worse. And far too powerful

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago

Google is only worse by virtue of their reach. OpenAI and Anthropic don't have the reach yet, but they absolutely will get there given the chance.

Before Google had the reach it has now, it was widely regarded as a comparitive 'good guy' and people believed in the "don't be evil". Lo and behold once they got going, "don't be evil" went away.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 2 points 9 hours ago

They're all evil, so we just have to exploit the ones that offer us some value. If Google is cheaper, and has the ability to damage the others, then Google it is.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

Google is shaping up to fare better than the others, but I dont think that means success. They, too, are spending more than its making, just at a less drunken rate than some competitors.