It's insane how many articles have dropped in the past 24 hours that all have a similar tone. At this point it's hard to see this as anything other than a broad coordination from someone who wants to destroy Jensen/Nvidia.
There is a 1T IPO coming up. I'd be surprised if they didn't hand over plenty of bucks to PR companies, grass root campaigns, influencers and journalists.
if we're going paranoid mode, on 9th of November Trump said that "leader of one large company connected to artificial intelligence" was almost sent to prison by Ministry of Justice due to wrongdoings connected to Ai, and this threat caused immediate correction by that company
I guess fingers crossed & good luck to them? After making consumer hardware unaffordable due to their greed I guess that is a reasonable outcome & karma at work.
I've been saying this for years, but dispensaries are speed-running the lessons that the craft beer industry learned. You start off with targeting the diehards with stronger drinks (DIPA, imperial stouts, etc), but eventually you need to branch out and target "normies".
It did mention medications. Perhaps pharmaceutical companies will charge 20% more for medications that are produced in space vs those produced on Earth?
>data centres need to BYONCE (Bring Your Own New Clean Energy)
This is just another way of saying "no data centers can be built". The people who want to build data centers don't care what it's powered by, but they choose gas turbines over wind & solar because renewables can't handle the power demands.
That seems like an awfully defeatist attitude. With all the capital investment flowing into AI, there should be plenty of money to research and improve renewables (including fusion, fission, and battery technology) to meet the moment. After all, we need to move past fossil fuels and are already delayed on this path, so AI is a good catalyst (among many) to make progress.
On a meta-level, it's terrible politics for tech companies to roll out a technology that many don't see a need for and fear will take away their livelihood, while at the same time increasing CO2 emissions because renewables are too hard. Of course this course of action runs into massive opposition.
I'm not sure how this is a defeatist attitude, I view it more like a realist one. Any rules that would be passed to require mandatory clean energy sourcing for data centers would probably mimic new vehicle emission regulations, which are purposely designed to be so hard to meet that it's a de facto ban.
Have you tried asking Claude? Surely it can solve the problem of "how can we power AI with clean energy?" I mean, if it couldn't do that ... well, it wouldn't really be useful enough to justify building all these datacenters, would it?
Florida passed a state law that has standards are somewhat close to what you wrote, yet communities down here still voted to ban datacenter construction.
This is why free markets need reasonable legislation.
Even if a good willing CEO wants to do what's right, he is pressured not to do it by the unlegislated free market - his company is at (economical) disadvantage with the opposition, putting the company at risk or not meeting his obligations to shareholders. Let's not blame consumers either, because they cannot be informed about consequences in the nth order either.
If the legislation is reasonable, everyone must play by the same rules, both the good and the bad willing CEOs. The companies gain trust, the government too, and the consumers (and affected citizens) win.
>Its surprising to me that the market is still stuck on SaaSpocalypse not noticing that these companies have pivoted hard in an impressive and revenue generating way
The cost of Figmas tokens was a frequent source of consternation at my prior engagement, and this was with a company that gave anybody $750/mo in Cursor credits if they asked nicely and filled out a form. Figma is also facing competition from Claude Design as well as other design tools that have a much cheaper price per seat, and allow you to BYOM. I wouldn't be surprised to see enterprises support a design tool switch if a lead showed how much money the company would save by switching away from Figma to something else.
From being on the other side of the table and seeing many of their clients, I’m seeing clients still pay the upfront engagement.
Claude Design isn’t going to change a corporation’s workflow, an individual contributor isn’t going to cause a workflow change in their own department and especially not another department. Management operates their department in a silo. The outside consultancy driving the executive’s desired AI transformation will. Figma/Adobe/Canva are operating there, and not just coming in with their own software. They just steer things in the direction of also burning tokens.
They’re doing workflow automations not really so vendor locked.
I'm honestly not sure what took them so long. They've had Figma Make out for about a year/a bit more than a year at this point. Make can call OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google models, and I have no doubt that all those companies structured a deal in a way that lets them view what users are requesting, rejecting, editing, etc and train their models on that information.
I was going to say it was made by Claude, but only because the screenshot of the dashboard has the users name in unnecessary italics, which to me is 100% a giveaway that it's Claude.
reply