Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
keeda | on: Changes at Google DeepMind: Demis Hassabis from CEO to Chair, Jeff Dean departs
I dunno if it's a sound strategy that involves repeatedly telling investors [1] and employees [2] over multiple quarters that you are desperate for compute, including leaving a triple-digit billion backlog on the table [3], and then spending so much on CapEx that you have your first negative cash flow quarter ever and taking the inevitable hit to the stock [4], while turning away a large paying customer (who also happen to be a competitor) [5] ;-)

[1] https://www.mindstudio.ai/blog/sundar-pichai-google-compute-...

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/21/google-must-double-ai-servin...

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-22/google-sa...

[4] https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/07/google-just-had-its-f...

[5] https://thenextweb.com/news/google-caps-meta-gemini-compute-...

haldujai | parent
Backlog meaning RPO over 5 years. It’s not as if they would be able to collect 250B today from OpenAI and Anthropic if they were to have that compute.

In any case, my point is that the SpaceX deal specifically likely has ulterior motives.

keeda | root | parent
The RPO can be anywhere from 3 - 6 years, sure, but even on an annual basis that’s like a hundred billion now. It was already in the double-digit billions since before AI took off and has only been spiking since then, which tells us 1) it’s been huge for 3+ years, and 2) it’s still growing faster than they can collect it. This matches what all the other hyperscalers are doing.

My point is that an ulterior motive is not necessary to assume when all their actions and statements point to them being severely crunched for compute.

I mean sure, if they had a choice between say, CoreWeave and SpaceX, they’d choose the latter for the nice bump to SpaceX’s financials and their stake… but not just for that, not when it contributes to their cash flow turning negative and their own stock taking a hit.

haldujai | root | parent
It is very suspicious when they’re paying for GB300 more than they turn around and charge those out as a4x instances, it was announced a week before IPO and they have a 90 day exit option.

> The RPO can be anywhere from 3 - 6 years, sure, but even on an annual basis that’s like a hundred billion now.

OpenAI and Anthropic deals are mostly 5 year and Anthropic’s starts in 2027, accordingly these RPOs are sized for projected compute needs and run rate in 2027 not today.

The only way either lab could pay 1 year of RPOs today (~80B for anthropic and ~150B for OpenAI) is with a lot more debt or circular financing, the former of which is difficult in this market.

Everyone spending crazy money on capex right now says they have a crushing backlog and need more compute to protect their share price. I highly doubt the demand exists today at current prices if the big 3 hyperscalers magically had an extra 2-3GW of compute. It’s not like Anthropic and OpenAI are turning away customers offering to pay API pricing..