Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
>There's an important distinction here. Anthropic isn't actually spending more cash on AI than salaries. It's valuing its internal AI consumption at retail prices.

If virtually any other company in the world said "we have internal AI servers and we let our employees use them" ... the company would measure that as they would any other internal expenditure: by how much it costs them. You blow $50k a year on servers running your LLMs? It cost you $50k.

Only a company like Anthropic, desperate to make news and help their IPO, would measure by the cost they charge customers. It's as ridiculous as Microsoft counting every employee's use of MS Word ... as if it had paid the full consumer price of each copy.

No. This is opportunity cost.

A clear example is Google. They can easily give all compute to Deepmind, yet majority is allocated to be sold at market rate.

So, every compute Deepmind and Googlers get is lost revenue opportunity and must be measured as such.

No other internal tools or servers has this much external demand to be comparable.

Also, Anthropic is showing that to operate at Anthropic level, you need $300,000 compute spend per employee

loading story #50342610
loading story #50341580
loading story #50341297
loading story #50341873
loading story #50340988
loading story #50341986
loading story #50340667
loading story #50340325
loading story #50340280
loading story #50340552
loading story #50340525
loading story #50341135
loading story #50341933
loading story #50340311
loading story #50340678
loading story #50340728
loading story #50342721
Plenty of companies use retail/wholesale pricing internally to make sure a business unit doesn’t appear profitable just because it’s being subsidized by the one providing the resources. Plenty also have to have arm’s length pricing for legal reasons.

Anthropic isn’t booking it as GAAP revenue, they’re just using the number for marketing.

loading story #50342732
loading story #50340395
loading story #50342146
loading story #50341545
loading story #50341189
loading story #50340965
{"deleted":true,"id":50340282,"parent":50340052,"time":1793640402,"type":"comment"}
In a lot of companies, you would get charges back on usage/license/cost and this can get even funnier in NGOs.

In a similar way, internal employees would have also a "standard daily rate" like an external employee.

loading story #50341390
{"deleted":true,"id":50340180,"parent":50340052,"time":1793640105,"type":"comment"}
Seems entirely in line with Hollywood-style practices.
Actually I think it's very informational. For every other company, working on the cutting edge of technology, paying for intelligence at retail prices, means you are now paying more for AI than you are employees. That $ could have been spent on 2x the employees, however that's not as useful as 50% AI / 50% humans, and indicative of where we are headed.
loading story #50340854
Anthropic's use of AI in no way translates or represents any other companies' use of AI, so your apparent extrapolation makes no sense.
Do they actually book the revenue against themselves?

This is the world of spend more, get valued more; obviously the investment will be used to spend more and get more, so it must be good. This is investor-think. If you don't have spend, why do you need investment?

(Or it could be bad. Very very bad)