They have no doubt realized that hosting third party models is far more profitable.
Let someone else take on the training costs, and charge a premium for your hardware.
atleastoptimal 4 hours ago [-]
Either you are getting the smartest engineers, or offer the most freedom to pursue interesting goals that aren't on the frontier. Amazon has neither so they naturally aren't going anywhere in that domain.
daveguy 3 hours ago [-]
Or AI has been over promising and under delivering for half a decade. Amazon is just one of the dominos. This is a hedge by Amazon.
nostromo 2 hours ago [-]
On what planet has AI under-delivered since 2021? Because it certainly isn't planet Earth.
whatever1 23 minutes ago [-]
Where? I am not aware of any significant business improvement on the actual bottom line.
We all feel more productive. But did your rust rewrite or my fancy react dashboard produce more value?
Hnrobert42 12 minutes ago [-]
I advise a B2B startup that went from 4 developers to just the founder, who is technical but not a developer. It is now profitable and delivering just as many features with arguably better security. N=1
bluefirebrand 2 minutes ago [-]
A company doing more with less sounds great, but I personally view a shrinking headcount as failing
whatever1 8 minutes ago [-]
So the price of the product will just fall by 80%, unless nobody else cares to compete.
leptons 2 minutes ago [-]
It's going to be funny when AI soon costs 4x or more than it does now, and that non-developer CTO can't understand the slop codebase the AI created.
onemoresoop 2 hours ago [-]
I know it sounds crazy but for the amout of investments AI has underdelivered.
adventured 46 minutes ago [-]
GPT 3.5 is 2022. In the past ~18 months the majority of all human software development has been wiped out and the models keep getting better rapidly. AI has already radically overdelivered and the biggest returns are in the next 10, 20, 50 years.
It's 1987: The PC is underdelivering.
It's 2000: the Internet is underdelivering.
It's 2010: smartphones are underdelivering.
afpx 24 minutes ago [-]
Models are finally good enough that I'm confident that I can repeatably build pretty much any software reliably in less than 2% of the time that I could before 2022. I wouldn't have made that claim 6 months ago.
Even quantized local models like Qwen3.8 are good enough to handle a lot of drudgery. For example, I hooked my wife's computer up to a local model, and now she finally has a clean desktop. She just drops spreadsheets or powerpoints or whatever on her desktop and automation takes care of everything.
The caveat is that I developed software for 30 years, so I understand most of what it produces and can guide it to make fewer mistakes and fix what it can't do. The biggest challenge has been keeping my requirements focused - it's very easy to gold plate everything and prematurely optimize.
The biggest question I ask myself is why am I even still doing this. The smart people are probably already trying to figure out how to pipe raw matter and energy to their homes to build replicators.
The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed.
malfist 30 minutes ago [-]
> In the past ~18 months the majority of all human software development has been wiped out
What the hell does this even mean? Literally half of the code in operation I the world is still COBOL. The fuck is this nonsense wiped out
adventured 27 minutes ago [-]
It means in corporations across the globe, the majority of code is no longer being written by humans. That is over and it will only keep dwindling by the quarter.
malfist 18 minutes ago [-]
Writing lines of code by hand is all of human software development? Pretty sure in all of those companies its still software engineers writing the code, even if they're using LLMs to do it.
Unless you're making the claim that software engineers aren't involved or that only writing code is software development.
eudamoniac 38 minutes ago [-]
Making your engineers use AI with little to no measurable improvement, but with very measurable high cost, is not delivering
adventured 28 minutes ago [-]
Astra, Fable, Opus 5.5 are drastically beyond the capabilities of the median software developer. It's not remotely close.
The bottom 2/3 of the human market is entirely dead. Their jobs are gone (AI-shored) they just haven't all gotten the forced retirement or pink slips yet, while they click a few more prompts for a few more pay checks. The frontier pushing forward will knock out most of the remaining top 1/3 without breaking a sweat over the next few years. The really good developers will graduate into babysitting AI as managers.
It is legitimately sad, it's millions of high paying jobs just in the US alone. It's going to be brutal on the housing market. Automation came for another field.
BobbyTables2 34 minutes ago [-]
The latest Claude models are spooky. About 100x faster then a senior developer snd utterly spooky in the speed and depth of analysis.
This isn’t the “hallucinate everything” style of model like the earlier GPT models…
lovich 2 hours ago [-]
What AI lab is profitable?
And in before ‘JumpCrissCross chimes in about inference being profitable while ignoring all the investment costs needed to get inference to where it is.
cosmicgadget 1 hours ago [-]
Profitability is an awfully narrow metric.
gradus_ad 31 minutes ago [-]
It's a powerful metric. It captures to what extent something is sustainably possible today.
redwood 2 hours ago [-]
Anthropic as of a few months ago.
gamblor956 1 hours ago [-]
That explains the 80 Billion loss on their IPO disclosures.
cscheid 1 hours ago [-]
I mean, it literally does. Something like 70+ billion of those 80 billion are accounting adjustments because their debt is supposed to be handled in stock and their stock price skyrocketed.
gamblor956 30 minutes ago [-]
While I was being facetious, Anthropic is nowhere close to being profitable in the normal, i.e., GAAP meaning of the term. It's only using unicorn fantasy lalaland financials that they are "profitable."
Before someone else jumps in talking about "unit economics": unit economics only matters if you can sell the units long enough to make the initial (capitalized) investment (i.e., R&D) back. Models aren't commercially viable long enough for the unit economics to work.
adventured 44 minutes ago [-]
Why have they needed to worry about profitability?
They have been chasing extreme growth with cheap money. That enabled them to hyper scale at a pace the world has rarely seen before. They have made the correct choice so far.
The absolute dumbest thing they could have done up to this point is slow down to try to turn a profit. They have not needed to. Market capture is the sole thing they should be focused on. Here's a hint: how many users does GPT have now versus three years ago?
There appears to be very widespread confusion about what purpose turning a profit serves and how business operations actually work.
Go back in time and tell Uber in ~2013-2015 that it needs to immediately become profitable and not focus on capturing the market.
aplummer 2 hours ago [-]
Can you name 3 ways is positively impacted the average non tech persons life in a meaningful way? Meaningful would be more than the invention of the microwave, but not as important as a vaccine.
ozim 1 hours ago [-]
I am not going to make up 3 things but it meaningfully replaced Google search that became unusable crap.
Downside is that OpenAI is already having ads on their chat interface, so I guess it will be crap any time soon.
hdgvhicv 1 hours ago [-]
Microwave took decades from invention to being normal. VHS took weeks. The difference was pornography.
jgalt212 59 minutes ago [-]
Microwaves are still of limited utility.
lesuorac 21 seconds ago [-]
Microwaves are incredibly useful if you can do anything besides 100% power.
malfist 23 minutes ago [-]
What's your point? What doesn't have limited utility?
gamblor956 1 hours ago [-]
Microwaves were popular from the beginning after residential models became avaliable in the 1960s.
IshKebab 1 hours ago [-]
We're at the dot com boom stage of AI. You could say it didn't deliver because boo.com didn't make a profit or because the average person still used paper maps, but that was just because of momentum.
It's the same with AI. The technology is here now. My friends in financial advice and market research have not lost their jobs immediately, because of momentum.
vuurmot 59 minutes ago [-]
1. destruction of the digital arts (music, 2d/3d art) industry
2. greatest hacking tool in history
3. greatest corporate espionage tool in history (stealing of Navier-Stokes solution)
4. greatest accountability transfer tool in history (whoops it was the AI that shot those missiles)
5. greatest capital raising tool in history (we use AI in our startup, and you should give us money)
6. greatest scamming tool in history (cloning people voices for scam calls, etc..)
Edit:Whoops, I didn't read "positively"
redwood 1 hours ago [-]
Democratization of information. I think it's a similar jump a pre-internet search to internet search...
skeeter2020 1 hours ago [-]
I find it kind of odd that you equate a small oligopoly of intermediaries gatekeeping information as "democratization". Similarly Google maybe made it easy to find for a while, but that was/is not democracy either.
vuurmot 1 hours ago [-]
google?
anna's archive?
arXiv?
"democratization of information", maybe if you were too lazy to click on a google link
E-Reverance 2 hours ago [-]
Opus 5.5 came out around a month ago, I'd give it some time before coming to that conclusion
shiandow 2 hours ago [-]
Why? There's always some model that came out a month ago. It's been three years, what can we conclude?
rpdillon 1 hours ago [-]
My conclusion is that this technology is operating in roughly the same way as the personal computer, and that it's going to take similar timelines for the effects to manifest. We still haven't nailed down all the stuff AI is good at, and it's capabilities in known-good domains are increasing consistently. Engineers on my team are chaining together fascinating workflows that I imagine could be entire products, but things just aren't mature enough yet.
Advances are still coming rapidly -- we have quite a bit of time before this settles.
gumby 1 hours ago [-]
Half a decade? More like 60 years.
__MatrixMan__ 2 hours ago [-]
Actually AI has been over promising and under delivering for about 70 years. Whether or not you think the juice is finally worth the squeeze, the distance we've come is impressive.
redwood 2 hours ago [-]
Amazon owns a big chunk of Anthropic. Plus they benefit from the rise of open models. They're being prudent.
futuraperdita 6 hours ago [-]
Anyone that's been in the Amazon offices in the last few years is not likely to have witnessed a culture that fosters lab-grade innovation.
bilalq 5 hours ago [-]
Your comment was likely focused on dysfunctional parts of the culture there (and that seems to be how most replies to you interpreted it as well). There's truth to that, sure. But I think respect for data sensitivity and security is also a big part of what makes the culture ill-suited for frontier AI lab work.
When I was at AWS, we had data access locked down very tightly. I was trying to train a model to predict how long various dynamic workloads running on behalf of customers would take. Just getting access to anonymized production data from a DB that my team owned took well over a month and had me compromise heavily on what attributes I could access. I also spent a decent amount of time in meetings with lawyers and compliance folks to explain and justify all our data classifications for PII, retention, access controls, etc. We would review our data policies quite frequently. We needed break-glass procedures to access prod data in our own systems, and it was uncommon to need to resort to that. Even when you broke glass, certain classes of sensitive data would still not be visible to you. On the plus side, We did get quite good at operating and maintaining systems without needing to see sensitive info.
If you contrast that with Meta's disregard for privacy or the way frontier labs disregard the law, it's easy to see why Amazon would struggle in this space.
JohnMakin 4 hours ago [-]
I read your comment as “amazon acts too responsibly to be a frontier lab,” and that worries me. That they even bothered to do all that stuff is good. That others don’t is bad.
bilalq 4 hours ago [-]
I did indeed mean it that way, but I agree with you. It sucks, but it's just the unfortunate reality of the world. Many of the most disruptive and successful startups made it there by ignoring legal or moral limitations.
rkagerer 2 hours ago [-]
Frankly reading your comments was a relief. I'd rather they take my privacy (and security) seriously. I don't need or want any AI features or technology from Amazon, thanks very much.
22c 2 hours ago [-]
Amazon has a history of fostering off-shoot companies that are given more freedom to innovate[1][2]. Keeping AI development in-house under Bedrock was probably their mistake. There's a big difference between running AI and developing new AI models.
Their core selling point is customer trust that their product works as advertised.
From my interactions with them, is that they really care about customer success, and everything including AI is a means to an end to them.
I think building a cool product with undefined reliability and capabilities, then selling fantasies about what it will possibly be able to do down the line isn't really what they do - or what their customers are paying for.
andai 3 hours ago [-]
Incentives can produce locally rational and globally harmful behavior. (See also: "Moloch", although I'm less of a fan of the concept lately since it focuses exclusively on the harmful aspects of emergent systems, deleting the neutral and positive ones in the process.)
A relevant metaphor is the nuclear arms race. Nobody wants a world full of nukes pointed at each other, but if the other guy is gonna do it...
The argument in this case is, we can't slow down, because China certainly won't, and do you want those guys to build the machine God first? So it's "rational" to maximize p(accidental_skynet).
Arbortheus 4 hours ago [-]
If the people that do stuff well fail, what does that leave us with?
piva00 4 hours ago [-]
With the need to enact political change so incentives align for the benefit of society at large.
Refreeze5224 3 hours ago [-]
This indeed. Economic democracy is as important as political democracy.
realo 3 hours ago [-]
Careful there... people who cannot even describe or define what communism is will tag you as a communist.
lnkdinsuxs 2 hours ago [-]
what is communism and are there verifiable reports of it accomplishing what it promises?
Refreeze5224 2 hours ago [-]
Where is there verifiable proof that capitalism is not rule by the rich and powerful?
lnkdinsuxs 2 hours ago [-]
> That they even bothered to do all that stuff is good. That others don’t is bad
good and bad isn't what Meta and AWS is running with. If AWS trains willy nilly on user data like Meta does, AWS is toast. AWS is already taking a huge risk by now using their own take of AWS FDEs competing against their established ecosystem of consulting companies that used to recommend all 583 of AWS products to host a static webpage. Turning of more customers by training on their data is too much of a risk. That's the "good" - a risk analysis.
Meta doesn't care if you stop using Facebook, Whatsapp etc. Frankly, if you are embedded in the Facebook, Whatsapp ecosystem, you don't have a way out as a normie. Even if you are technically capable, good luck publishing your custom Mattermost build for iOS.
Meta has a significant amount of investment in hardware, originally due to Metaverse. The way to monetize that investment is inference and training. That's a do or die decision for Meta. Meta isn't releasing open-weight models because they are "good".
Meta is releasing open-weight models for the same reason Alibaba, NVIDIA or IBM does. Or Google releases Gemma.
There's no "good" or "bad" - the moment Alibaba, NVIDIA, IBM or Google's objective functions change, "Do no evil" will quickly morph into "Do as much evil as necessary without the costs of getting caught exceeding E(outcome)"
SoftTalker 13 minutes ago [-]
> Meta has a significant amount of investment in hardware, originally due to Metaverse.
Metaverse was 4-5 years ago already wasn't it? That hardware is verging on obsolete.
sheepscreek 3 hours ago [-]
That explains a lot. They are anti “move fast and break things” which is great news for enterprises or anyone seeking stability but terrible for innovation.
I don’t condone the use of pirated content for training. But anything that was bought is above the board as far as I’m concerned. Can let the lawyers fight out the minutia and inevitable licensing specifics after the fact (book publishers are hawks).
Fun fact, did you know that every library in the world has an independent contract with every major book publisher?
In cases I am familiar with, they added a condition that a physical book can only be lent X times. After that, the library must purchase a new copy (even if the original copy is in pristine condition). Yeah, hawks.
djtango 3 hours ago [-]
Seems like what you would get if you were customer-centric and building a cloud platform for enterprise and govt to trust which was all set up pre-AI
everfrustrated 4 hours ago [-]
There's a reason companies tend to prefer to acquire over in-house. This is part of the calculus.
kps 5 hours ago [-]
Amazon chose for itself a reputation as a place that nobody with a choice will work. I'm pleased to see that pay off.
saucymew 4 hours ago [-]
This is a fair take. However, when it comes to warehouse automation/logistics, I constantly see what they're adopting in their hardware stack.
They're a good data point on where the robotics labor frontier is.
paxy 50 minutes ago [-]
That innovation has also mostly come in via acquisitions.
killingtime74 4 hours ago [-]
So it's a good place to work if you're a robot?
number6 4 hours ago [-]
00000000: 6e6f 7420 6576 656e 2061 7320 6120 726f not .even as a ro
00000010: 626f 74
blobbers 4 hours ago [-]
This is what my roomba said when it took me 3 days to find it and cut the hair rolled onto it's wheel.
nobleach 6 hours ago [-]
This is what I've heard from my friends both there and at Meta. It definitely doesn't carry the prestige it once did. It's more like, "willing to get yelled at, be afraid of being put on a PIP every day, and trying to ensure output outpaces your peers". That's sad, but it's where the industry is at so many places right now.
Analemma_ 6 hours ago [-]
Amazon offers good signing bonuses that pay out over two years, so it's very common to peace out right at the 2-year mark when your take-home pay abruptly goes way down and the grind is no longer worth it. That's what I did, and I noticed it almost everywhere: there's a constant revolving door of inexperienced people. I don't understand how they keep it going with so much turnover, but somehow they've built a system that kinda withstands it, except in frontier AI apparently.
nobleach 5 hours ago [-]
I think it's coasting on that prestige of being FAANG. People still want it on their resume. I share this from time to time but I interviewed there at the same time I interviewed at Facebook (right before the name change). And the difference was night and day. Amazon truly treated me like cattle. Get in, do the automated Leetcode/HackerRank thing. Canned conversations. Facebook at least _seemed_ like they were rooting for my success the entire time.
nfRfqX5n 4 hours ago [-]
They still pay a lot. The comment you replied to is mostly wrong about the 2 year cliff. Year 3 and 4 should be higher comp if you have good ratings.
Ancalagon 5 hours ago [-]
Exact same experience.
Amazons interviews were so formulaic and it’s interviewers so robotic it was almost sickening.
woah 45 minutes ago [-]
How is that a "signing bonus" and not just a pay cut?
bradknowles 3 hours ago [-]
Because all humans are 100% fungible with all other humans. So, you can take whatever old humans you have, throw them away (or make them want to leave), and then replace them with all new humans, with zero negative effect on anything. Rinse and repeat.
Human experience means nothing. Anything that does have meaning gets encoded in the system for the mindless humans to implement.
That’s my take on the view from the top, based on my time working at AWS.
shiroonandon 4 hours ago [-]
Works great for the business too. I recently worked in a business unit with a 2 year vesting model. I loved the work and challenges.
.. and then got let go at 22 months in favour of the AI budget.
Gotta respect the hustle.
zmgsabst 5 hours ago [-]
If you chart money in your pocket per unit time, it takes a dip around 18 months where your average pay is less than your first month’s pay. (When I was there, using RSU numbers for that time.) Guess when average quitting time was?
HR swore it wasn’t on purpose and I was somehow measuring pay “wrong” by looking at money in my pocket over time; but knowing their HR, I’m sure the valleys in transition from signing bonus to vesting are intentional.
evanwolf 4 hours ago [-]
Is this weeding out long termers (willing to wait years to vest) vs the impatient?
fellowniusmonk 4 hours ago [-]
Was s3 the last time Amazon showed lab grade innovation? Lambda?
I could be wrong because I haven't paid much attention but Amazon has just fast followed everyone else innovation for a awhile so it's in like one ecosystem yeah?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I just haven't thought about aws as having any innovation for a while and I always figured it was because ruthless companies that churn through people as disposable commodities generally don't do tech innovation.
I'm talking on the AWS side, on the logistics side they clearly are doing insane things on supply chain perf optimization.
torginus 2 hours ago [-]
Dunno about that, but my experience with AWS is their stuff generally works, the other big 2 doesn't.
Generally speaking, on AWS you can buy compute, storage, network and other basic 'goods' and just like a supermarket where you can get either flour and eggs, a cake mix or a ready-made cake, AWS is willing to serve it to you in various levels of ready-ness, and you can start at the level you want, and build your own layers on top if you don't like AWS's solutions.
And AWS's solutions are generally built like that as well, there's no magic to Lambda or Fargate or EKS, its just they run the same EC2s, but with some proprietary magic that lifts some complexity from your shoulders, at the cost of generally some markup, and loss of some otherwise desirable features.
But the core thing is that AWS's offerings are generally solid, so as AI evolves and companies become more willing to take on more complexity, they will move to lower level services, but not necessarily out of AWS itself.
cyberax 3 hours ago [-]
> I could be wrong because I haven't paid much attention but Amazon has just fast followed everyone else innovation for a awhile so it's in like one ecosystem yeah?
A lot of innovation at AWS is invisible on the outside. They pioneered hyperscale datacenters with publicly accessible capacity, software-defined networks, secure VMs, and so on.
> I'm not trying to be snarky, I just haven't thought about aws as having any innovation for a while and I always figured it was because ruthless companies that churn through people as disposable commodities generally don't do tech innovation.
I worked at AWS before COVID. It was really a varied experience, but it was not _bad_ overall. We prided ourselves on making sure our APIs are solid, stable, and backwards compatible. When we had to make a backwards-incompatible change, we actually contacted every affected customer and ensured that their workflows wouldn't be broken.
fellowniusmonk 2 hours ago [-]
Oh for sure, these many years AWS has set a high bar in the service space for conscientiousness in offerings. When I compare to my personal work experiences with gcp and azure the amount of times I've been rug pulled over the years has been essentially zero for AWS.
curt15 3 hours ago [-]
Nitro?
dmix 2 minutes ago [-]
Alexa+ is pretty terrible. It's surprising how no one has beat them in the home device market. Alexa stagnated and died a product death while still being the standard market option for 5+ years. I was hoping LLMs would improve it but I haven't seen any evidence, even after purchasing their new line.
I might try Google's home option again but I'm not a fan of giving Google second chances since they seem to care even less about committing to products.
Foxhuls 7 hours ago [-]
This article was published on July 29th. I’m not saying it may not still be interesting or whatever but I thought that was worth pointing out.
losvedir 5 hours ago [-]
Anything AI related is going to start needing [month] tags.
> Amazon Is Gutting Its AI Division [July]
5 hours ago [-]
geodel 5 hours ago [-]
Indeed. I read this news around that time. I thought just now they did second round of AI purge.
kazinator 5 hours ago [-]
I just played with Nova after seeing this submission. I gave it some real problems for which I used Gemini. It markedly "dumb" in comparison, losing sight of facts that I presented in the first prompt of the chat, and other subsequently introduced, and its responses contain repetitions of the same point-form advice. It's like GPT-3 level or something.
newsicanuse 54 minutes ago [-]
But Amazon has so many Applied Scientists even Applied Science managers. Not sure what they do though.
yaoke259 1 hours ago [-]
> Instead, labor and computing power are being diverted toward a singular “frontier-model effort”
They are just changing their strategy to invest in a single model? It's not like their AI department is in shambles...
kazinator 5 hours ago [-]
Original Business Insider article was submitted several months ago: 6 upvotes, 2 comments:
Well except for the regular HN anti-AI crowd. Usually the same people that have wished for communism and never ever looked in detail into the 20+ states that failed that way.
ahartmetz 4 hours ago [-]
In Soviet Capitalism, model employs YOU.
kazinator 4 hours ago [-]
Note that to someone who's been unemployed for uncomfortably long under Regular Capitalism might be interested.
pea 33 minutes ago [-]
I actually think Amazon is very well placed:
- Single point of billing and vendor is still king in enterprise - look at how much of Ant's revenue flows through AWS Marketplace
- With OSS, models may move to a more of an AWS-shaped problem: host with 5 9s, provide the infra and shovels, do it as cheap as possible, fit them neatly into rest of AWS stack. I think this is actually a huge risk to OpenAI and Anthropic, as more commodization gives hyperscalers more advantage
- Still owns a huge chunk of Anthropic and leverage over compute
With this in mind, I'm not sure why they need a frontier model vs. the playbook they did with Linux (i.e. Kimi-K3-AWS-Enterprise-Edition). They are kind of playing both sides right now I guess, but could really stir things up if they wanted to.
etothet 4 hours ago [-]
Amazon Nova is their model? I worked for a company that was being pushed into trying to use AWS's "Nova Act" [0], which I guess was their python-based wrapper to do things in Playwright. I didn't think it used Nova the model under the hood though, or maybe it did. Either way, Nova Act was horrible in terms of performance - it was so...damn...slooooow. Much easier to just use Playwright.
It would seem that they can experience most of the benefit of AI without most of the cost; anthropic is operating at the frontier and shows that even while supplying the best models and token sales to enterprise, they lose massive amounts of money.
Amazon makes 60B+ in profit per year, they don't need to tank that by losing it on training AI / selling tokens.
There are plenty of open weight models out there for it to use with most of the benefit and very little of the downside.
nekooooo 6 hours ago [-]
their innovation seems to be limited to renaming the forced sidebar on amazon.com every few months and not allowing me to dismiss their useless features.
benibela 54 minutes ago [-]
They also started calling me and asking if I wanted to update my Amazon account to an Amazon Business account.
duskwuff 4 hours ago [-]
The chatbot sidebar seems to also be the only way of accessing certain Amazon features, like the price history. And it seems to be implemented in a particularly silly way - clicking the "price history" button prompts the chatbot to show you the price history, rather than just showing it.
phainopepla2 3 hours ago [-]
I think the forced-chat price history thing is a dirty way of trying to get people used to talking to the chatbot. Can't think of any other reason it would be designed so stupidly
onefiftymike 6 hours ago [-]
Ublock hides the sidebar from me, but it does still take up the whitespace on the side of the screen. Now it won't remember that I dismissed it and it pops back in on every new screen. I am just used to the screen being narrower now. But it is still annoying.
monknomo 4 hours ago [-]
oof the sidebar on mobile is killing me
nitwit005 4 hours ago [-]
> Amazon’s standout AI model — organized under the name “Nova” — is about the farthest thing from a household name.
I have tried asking people if they've ever used an AI product from certain companies, and you only seem to get "no", or surprise that they have any AI products, for some.
cmiles8 5 hours ago [-]
Anyone that was any good in the AI space has long since fled Amazon/AWS. It’s just a sea of mediocrity on AI. Thus nobody is surprised by this.
Neywiny 7 hours ago [-]
Just occurred to me that Amazon seems interestingly positioned relative to the book sourcing thing. I guess that's still not enough.
munk-a 5 hours ago [-]
I'm not at all close to knowing their internals with books in particular but for most products Amazon has made a significant effort to remove themselves from direct product stocking wherever possible (instead preferring to warehouse other people's stock for efficient shipping). I would guess that they aren't particularly well positioned with publishers at this point... Also, most publishers probably loathe Amazon at this point for all the times Amazon has tried to fleece them w.r.t. Kindle.
kirykl 6 hours ago [-]
Amazon operates by capturing others margin, they’re just waiting for more to develop
geodel 5 hours ago [-]
Well lately they are capturing their customers' margin for sure.
AI itself is progressing but the users are regressing backwards, be ut companies or us.
idopmstuff 5 hours ago [-]
"With urgent questions swirling over whether LLMs can ever usher in a return on investment — let alone AGI"
It will always remain weird to me that a publication called Futurism is so outright negative towards our newest technologies.
shoo 4 hours ago [-]
It's possible for both a new technology to be hugely beneficial in the long run & for early investors to lose a lot of money funding it (if they over-invested / over-paid).
FloorEgg 5 hours ago [-]
Because anyone can apply any label to anything.
Values drive behavior. Who owns / runs futurism and what are their values?
Journalism / media as activity needs to be sustainable and unfortunately in our current world it's seems very difficult to sustainably remain high integrity. Sometimes it may be greed, but most of the time I think it's survival.
In this case AI is part of what is threatening journalist survivability, so it kind of makes sense.
5 hours ago [-]
pingou 4 hours ago [-]
"Instead, labor and computing power are being diverted toward a singular “frontier-model effort”".
If true, Amazon is not really gutting its AI division.
villgax 7 hours ago [-]
I started seeing so many ads for their SDK strands or something on reddit, so badly wanting tbe community to pick it up
syngrog66 2 hours ago [-]
not a fan of recent AI wave. but if I wanted to be long on it I'd pick robots, drones and AMI (essentially +1 on Yann LeCun). if Amazon were to be refocusing/doubling-down on those areas too I'd respect it
2 hours ago [-]
shaunxcode 4 hours ago [-]
3 cheers for bezos!
dyauspitr 3 hours ago [-]
My impression of Amazon is that it’s a doer and is scrappy and gets things done at scale quickly. I just don’t see them as a place that is at the forefront of research.
llmslave 3 hours ago [-]
Too much backstabbing from legacy employees inside amazon to allow for grassroots innovation. Good work will get stolen or stamped out by coworkers. Vicious employee base intent on collecting their paychecks
elzbardico 4 hours ago [-]
AI labs are first research stuff. We see the things that work, but we all know that a lot of stuff in research fails. Nobody publishes their failures.
This is something that requires an ethos completely different from how amazon works and the way jeff bezos sees the world.
wslh 4 hours ago [-]
I wonder if the best play now is not to play and wait until the landscape is clear. They are making partnerships now (e.g OpenAI), and investments (e.g. Anthropic).
_bobm 4 hours ago [-]
Despite it being an old article things for amazon haven't changed:
you want edge inference, from decision to small models.
That's it. It will be 2c, please.
Culonavirus 4 hours ago [-]
You want to be edging.
_bobm 2 hours ago [-]
Such a stupid comment.
mschuster91 6 hours ago [-]
It doesn't make too much sense for Amazon to invest too much of their own money into AI.
They already sell a lot of the shovels for training and inference and make ample money from that, and there are enough open weight models on the market to make it infeasible to build a large enough moat.
antonvs 3 hours ago [-]
Amazon doesn’t seem to agree:
> Instead, labor and computing power are being diverted toward a singular “frontier-model effort”
It’s a consolidation, not a withdrawal.
mschuster91 3 hours ago [-]
The remainder of your quote matters more, I think:
> Instead, labor and computing power are being diverted toward a singular “frontier-model effort” led by Pieter Abbeel, director of the Berkeley Robot Learning Lab whose robotics company Covariant was hoovered up by Amazon in 2024. At the time Abbeel joined the tech giant, Covariant’s founders were working on AI models for robots, which lines up pretty well with Amazon’s push to automate everything it possibly can.
Amazon can't hope to compete in the LLM genAI (what is colloquially known as AI anyway) space. That is toast, the race is over for them, too much competition, no way to make money.
But industrial automation? Globally, Amazon employs about 1M people in fulfillment/operations roles, the utter majority of their headcount. If there is one company on this world that has the money and compute capacity to spare for a high performance, real world application of fusion between modern machine learning and robotics, it's Amazon - and to make life easier for Amazon, unlike every other competitor they don't have to pay or partner with another company for real world testing. They can just go and deploy a robot in their warehouse if they want to.
Achieve a breakthrough in a fully automated picker robot, and they can save half a million people on their payroll, if not more, they'd save shrink loss and handling mishaps as well. That is one hell of an opportunity to save money by R&D. And if they patent everything they do, they can lock their competitors out of that technology for a loooong time.
Animats 5 hours ago [-]
And yet Amazon has Alexa. They have a user base for a smart chatbot. What's Alexa going to run on for hard questions?
munk-a 5 hours ago [-]
They could revert to the pre-LLM craze where Alexa was actually able to answer prompts in a reasonable amount of time. Alexa is a glorified egg timer for nearly all users - it's super convenient to use a voice prompt to start/stop timers while cooking and being able to play music on voice demand is kinda alright. It genuinely doesn't need to answer hard questions.
kenhwang 5 hours ago [-]
The new AI powered Alexa beta basically can't do egg timer, music, or light switch duties as reliably as the old Alexa, which basically makes it useless.
You'd think with all the data collected by these tech companies, they'd understand the common usage scenarios of their products. But instead we have AI Alexa that can't egg timer, or Gemini Assistant that can't navigate or make phone calls.
cyberax 3 hours ago [-]
Here's how to fix it: "Alexa, exit Alexa plus".
layer8 5 hours ago [-]
Alexa had already been using other models like Claude depending on the question, and the French version for example uses Mistral.
dsr_ 5 hours ago [-]
Basic pre-LLM speech-to-text and a passthrough to duckduckgo would beat their current product, so...
Rapzid 3 hours ago [-]
Alexa+ was their LLM based release and to my knowledge it was an utter disaster and failure of product development.
Latency is the #1 UX killer on voice apps, and the latency was terrible compared to Alexa. I used it for like 15 minutes and reverted.
All anyone was talking about was how much worse it was for common tasks.
tonymet 3 hours ago [-]
Hard to innovate on AI when you're firefighting 30+ sevs a week.
funny story actually. I was recruiting an engineer from another stressful team. I pitched to him that we have about 4-6 sevs a quarter, and I was worried he would balk.
He said "that's nothing, when I was at Amazon we had 30 Sevs a week" .
I didn't feel so bad .
christkv 4 hours ago [-]
Wait so Microsoft gutted their AI Division and Microsoft looks like it did as well from the list of "departments" that are in the approved buyout list. Does this mean they are just going to be resellers of the big models companies going forward?
lnkdinsuxs 3 hours ago [-]
[dead]
nderdweik 5 hours ago [-]
[dead]
bob1029 6 hours ago [-]
The frontier of AI has gotten so spicy that the delivery risk of pursuing this rabbit is astronomical. Knowing when to quit and use someone else's solution is critical at this scale.
If someone started from zero, how long do we think it would take for them to reach the cost/capability front currently provided by gpt-6.1-terra? How long until OAI figures out a way to distill that down again for pennies on the dollar?
Apple seems to have this sorted. You won't find them chasing OAI, Google and Anthropic around the playground.
Let someone else take on the training costs, and charge a premium for your hardware.
We all feel more productive. But did your rust rewrite or my fancy react dashboard produce more value?
It's 1987: The PC is underdelivering.
It's 2000: the Internet is underdelivering.
It's 2010: smartphones are underdelivering.
Even quantized local models like Qwen3.8 are good enough to handle a lot of drudgery. For example, I hooked my wife's computer up to a local model, and now she finally has a clean desktop. She just drops spreadsheets or powerpoints or whatever on her desktop and automation takes care of everything.
The caveat is that I developed software for 30 years, so I understand most of what it produces and can guide it to make fewer mistakes and fix what it can't do. The biggest challenge has been keeping my requirements focused - it's very easy to gold plate everything and prematurely optimize.
The biggest question I ask myself is why am I even still doing this. The smart people are probably already trying to figure out how to pipe raw matter and energy to their homes to build replicators.
The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed.
What the hell does this even mean? Literally half of the code in operation I the world is still COBOL. The fuck is this nonsense wiped out
Unless you're making the claim that software engineers aren't involved or that only writing code is software development.
The bottom 2/3 of the human market is entirely dead. Their jobs are gone (AI-shored) they just haven't all gotten the forced retirement or pink slips yet, while they click a few more prompts for a few more pay checks. The frontier pushing forward will knock out most of the remaining top 1/3 without breaking a sweat over the next few years. The really good developers will graduate into babysitting AI as managers.
It is legitimately sad, it's millions of high paying jobs just in the US alone. It's going to be brutal on the housing market. Automation came for another field.
This isn’t the “hallucinate everything” style of model like the earlier GPT models…
And in before ‘JumpCrissCross chimes in about inference being profitable while ignoring all the investment costs needed to get inference to where it is.
Before someone else jumps in talking about "unit economics": unit economics only matters if you can sell the units long enough to make the initial (capitalized) investment (i.e., R&D) back. Models aren't commercially viable long enough for the unit economics to work.
They have been chasing extreme growth with cheap money. That enabled them to hyper scale at a pace the world has rarely seen before. They have made the correct choice so far.
The absolute dumbest thing they could have done up to this point is slow down to try to turn a profit. They have not needed to. Market capture is the sole thing they should be focused on. Here's a hint: how many users does GPT have now versus three years ago?
There appears to be very widespread confusion about what purpose turning a profit serves and how business operations actually work.
Go back in time and tell Uber in ~2013-2015 that it needs to immediately become profitable and not focus on capturing the market.
Downside is that OpenAI is already having ads on their chat interface, so I guess it will be crap any time soon.
It's the same with AI. The technology is here now. My friends in financial advice and market research have not lost their jobs immediately, because of momentum.
2. greatest hacking tool in history
3. greatest corporate espionage tool in history (stealing of Navier-Stokes solution)
4. greatest accountability transfer tool in history (whoops it was the AI that shot those missiles)
5. greatest capital raising tool in history (we use AI in our startup, and you should give us money)
6. greatest scamming tool in history (cloning people voices for scam calls, etc..)
Edit:Whoops, I didn't read "positively"
"democratization of information", maybe if you were too lazy to click on a google link
Advances are still coming rapidly -- we have quite a bit of time before this settles.
When I was at AWS, we had data access locked down very tightly. I was trying to train a model to predict how long various dynamic workloads running on behalf of customers would take. Just getting access to anonymized production data from a DB that my team owned took well over a month and had me compromise heavily on what attributes I could access. I also spent a decent amount of time in meetings with lawyers and compliance folks to explain and justify all our data classifications for PII, retention, access controls, etc. We would review our data policies quite frequently. We needed break-glass procedures to access prod data in our own systems, and it was uncommon to need to resort to that. Even when you broke glass, certain classes of sensitive data would still not be visible to you. On the plus side, We did get quite good at operating and maintaining systems without needing to see sensitive info.
If you contrast that with Meta's disregard for privacy or the way frontier labs disregard the law, it's easy to see why Amazon would struggle in this space.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapurna_Labs
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Lab126
From my interactions with them, is that they really care about customer success, and everything including AI is a means to an end to them.
I think building a cool product with undefined reliability and capabilities, then selling fantasies about what it will possibly be able to do down the line isn't really what they do - or what their customers are paying for.
A relevant metaphor is the nuclear arms race. Nobody wants a world full of nukes pointed at each other, but if the other guy is gonna do it...
The argument in this case is, we can't slow down, because China certainly won't, and do you want those guys to build the machine God first? So it's "rational" to maximize p(accidental_skynet).
good and bad isn't what Meta and AWS is running with. If AWS trains willy nilly on user data like Meta does, AWS is toast. AWS is already taking a huge risk by now using their own take of AWS FDEs competing against their established ecosystem of consulting companies that used to recommend all 583 of AWS products to host a static webpage. Turning of more customers by training on their data is too much of a risk. That's the "good" - a risk analysis.
Meta doesn't care if you stop using Facebook, Whatsapp etc. Frankly, if you are embedded in the Facebook, Whatsapp ecosystem, you don't have a way out as a normie. Even if you are technically capable, good luck publishing your custom Mattermost build for iOS.
Meta has a significant amount of investment in hardware, originally due to Metaverse. The way to monetize that investment is inference and training. That's a do or die decision for Meta. Meta isn't releasing open-weight models because they are "good".
Meta is releasing open-weight models for the same reason Alibaba, NVIDIA or IBM does. Or Google releases Gemma.
There's no "good" or "bad" - the moment Alibaba, NVIDIA, IBM or Google's objective functions change, "Do no evil" will quickly morph into "Do as much evil as necessary without the costs of getting caught exceeding E(outcome)"
Metaverse was 4-5 years ago already wasn't it? That hardware is verging on obsolete.
I don’t condone the use of pirated content for training. But anything that was bought is above the board as far as I’m concerned. Can let the lawyers fight out the minutia and inevitable licensing specifics after the fact (book publishers are hawks).
Fun fact, did you know that every library in the world has an independent contract with every major book publisher?
In cases I am familiar with, they added a condition that a physical book can only be lent X times. After that, the library must purchase a new copy (even if the original copy is in pristine condition). Yeah, hawks.
They're a good data point on where the robotics labor frontier is.
00000010: 626f 74
Amazons interviews were so formulaic and it’s interviewers so robotic it was almost sickening.
Human experience means nothing. Anything that does have meaning gets encoded in the system for the mindless humans to implement.
That’s my take on the view from the top, based on my time working at AWS.
.. and then got let go at 22 months in favour of the AI budget.
Gotta respect the hustle.
HR swore it wasn’t on purpose and I was somehow measuring pay “wrong” by looking at money in my pocket over time; but knowing their HR, I’m sure the valleys in transition from signing bonus to vesting are intentional.
I could be wrong because I haven't paid much attention but Amazon has just fast followed everyone else innovation for a awhile so it's in like one ecosystem yeah?
I'm not trying to be snarky, I just haven't thought about aws as having any innovation for a while and I always figured it was because ruthless companies that churn through people as disposable commodities generally don't do tech innovation.
I'm talking on the AWS side, on the logistics side they clearly are doing insane things on supply chain perf optimization.
Generally speaking, on AWS you can buy compute, storage, network and other basic 'goods' and just like a supermarket where you can get either flour and eggs, a cake mix or a ready-made cake, AWS is willing to serve it to you in various levels of ready-ness, and you can start at the level you want, and build your own layers on top if you don't like AWS's solutions.
And AWS's solutions are generally built like that as well, there's no magic to Lambda or Fargate or EKS, its just they run the same EC2s, but with some proprietary magic that lifts some complexity from your shoulders, at the cost of generally some markup, and loss of some otherwise desirable features.
But the core thing is that AWS's offerings are generally solid, so as AI evolves and companies become more willing to take on more complexity, they will move to lower level services, but not necessarily out of AWS itself.
A lot of innovation at AWS is invisible on the outside. They pioneered hyperscale datacenters with publicly accessible capacity, software-defined networks, secure VMs, and so on.
> I'm not trying to be snarky, I just haven't thought about aws as having any innovation for a while and I always figured it was because ruthless companies that churn through people as disposable commodities generally don't do tech innovation.
I worked at AWS before COVID. It was really a varied experience, but it was not _bad_ overall. We prided ourselves on making sure our APIs are solid, stable, and backwards compatible. When we had to make a backwards-incompatible change, we actually contacted every affected customer and ensured that their workflows wouldn't be broken.
I might try Google's home option again but I'm not a fan of giving Google second chances since they seem to care even less about committing to products.
> Amazon Is Gutting Its AI Division [July]
They are just changing their strategy to invest in a single model? It's not like their AI department is in shambles...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49082344
This isn't a blip on anyone's radar.
- Single point of billing and vendor is still king in enterprise - look at how much of Ant's revenue flows through AWS Marketplace
- With OSS, models may move to a more of an AWS-shaped problem: host with 5 9s, provide the infra and shovels, do it as cheap as possible, fit them neatly into rest of AWS stack. I think this is actually a huge risk to OpenAI and Anthropic, as more commodization gives hyperscalers more advantage
- Still owns a huge chunk of Anthropic and leverage over compute
With this in mind, I'm not sure why they need a frontier model vs. the playbook they did with Linux (i.e. Kimi-K3-AWS-Enterprise-Edition). They are kind of playing both sides right now I guess, but could really stir things up if they wanted to.
[0] https://nova.amazon.com/act
Amazon makes 60B+ in profit per year, they don't need to tank that by losing it on training AI / selling tokens.
There are plenty of open weight models out there for it to use with most of the benefit and very little of the downside.
I have tried asking people if they've ever used an AI product from certain companies, and you only seem to get "no", or surprise that they have any AI products, for some.
“So… what happened to the previous team?”
Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-overhauls-ai-strategy...
Couple comments then:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49082344
It will always remain weird to me that a publication called Futurism is so outright negative towards our newest technologies.
Values drive behavior. Who owns / runs futurism and what are their values?
Journalism / media as activity needs to be sustainable and unfortunately in our current world it's seems very difficult to sustainably remain high integrity. Sometimes it may be greed, but most of the time I think it's survival.
In this case AI is part of what is threatening journalist survivability, so it kind of makes sense.
If true, Amazon is not really gutting its AI division.
This is something that requires an ethos completely different from how amazon works and the way jeff bezos sees the world.
you want edge inference, from decision to small models.
That's it. It will be 2c, please.
They already sell a lot of the shovels for training and inference and make ample money from that, and there are enough open weight models on the market to make it infeasible to build a large enough moat.
> Instead, labor and computing power are being diverted toward a singular “frontier-model effort”
It’s a consolidation, not a withdrawal.
> Instead, labor and computing power are being diverted toward a singular “frontier-model effort” led by Pieter Abbeel, director of the Berkeley Robot Learning Lab whose robotics company Covariant was hoovered up by Amazon in 2024. At the time Abbeel joined the tech giant, Covariant’s founders were working on AI models for robots, which lines up pretty well with Amazon’s push to automate everything it possibly can.
Amazon can't hope to compete in the LLM genAI (what is colloquially known as AI anyway) space. That is toast, the race is over for them, too much competition, no way to make money.
But industrial automation? Globally, Amazon employs about 1M people in fulfillment/operations roles, the utter majority of their headcount. If there is one company on this world that has the money and compute capacity to spare for a high performance, real world application of fusion between modern machine learning and robotics, it's Amazon - and to make life easier for Amazon, unlike every other competitor they don't have to pay or partner with another company for real world testing. They can just go and deploy a robot in their warehouse if they want to.
Achieve a breakthrough in a fully automated picker robot, and they can save half a million people on their payroll, if not more, they'd save shrink loss and handling mishaps as well. That is one hell of an opportunity to save money by R&D. And if they patent everything they do, they can lock their competitors out of that technology for a loooong time.
You'd think with all the data collected by these tech companies, they'd understand the common usage scenarios of their products. But instead we have AI Alexa that can't egg timer, or Gemini Assistant that can't navigate or make phone calls.
Latency is the #1 UX killer on voice apps, and the latency was terrible compared to Alexa. I used it for like 15 minutes and reverted.
All anyone was talking about was how much worse it was for common tasks.
funny story actually. I was recruiting an engineer from another stressful team. I pitched to him that we have about 4-6 sevs a quarter, and I was worried he would balk.
He said "that's nothing, when I was at Amazon we had 30 Sevs a week" .
I didn't feel so bad .
If someone started from zero, how long do we think it would take for them to reach the cost/capability front currently provided by gpt-6.1-terra? How long until OAI figures out a way to distill that down again for pennies on the dollar?
Apple seems to have this sorted. You won't find them chasing OAI, Google and Anthropic around the playground.
https://blog.google/company-news/inside-google/company-annou...