—
no calls resolved yet
0 scored
single source
I think of this as like a long game where eventually the self-service will come to us, but not because we subsidize, but because we have the best product in market.
This is sort of the world where the fireworks and the people who help make models possible, I think win, because the alternative is you only have a very few specialized providers that have models.
I think it's open models. I think the most cost effective solution for a model is going to be the cheap one that you can run locally on your computer.
And so for them, I think this is very reasonable
I would say that if they think that data gives them insight into how to run Stripe better as well, that could also potentially make it worth it.
$8 billion is quite steep though. So stranger things have happened.
If you're Stripe, you already control the flow of one out of the three of these. With OpenRouter, rather than the routing technology, you actually just gain the information of where these models are going, right? You start to understand what are people doing with intelligence? How are they allocating it? To what models are they using? So now you start to control the second of these three things.
if somebody comes up and says, look, Stripe bought OpenRouter for $8 billion because of the technology, then I'd say either A, if they have insider knowledge, then that was a bad decision. If B, they're just sort of assigning that to it, I think they're missing what I read when I read the letter to shareholders, which was that they see this as a bet on where the direction of capital allocation is going.
This is sort of the world where the fireworks and the people who help make models possible, I think win, because the alternative is you only have a very few specialized providers that have models.
What has happened is quite the opposite. Basically, model providers have even acknowledged that all of the continual learning happens at the harness layer. That learning is basically something that businesses are going to find very critical that they own, that they are the sovereign of.
something that I think at factory, we're trying to spend as much time as possible educating people about sort of what does well in the harness versus what can be done outside and how to think about like building versus buying a harness.
if you have a product that requires 100 FDEs to get it deployed, you just have a bad product.
Part of what makes it interesting to build right now is that a lot of what you're selling is not only the technology, but your knowledge about how to best use that technology... if you combine that with a product that then acts a little bit more as a platform or a system rather than a tool that people use, you can also get stickier by just being something that you build on top of.
I think of this as like a long game where eventually the self-service will come to us, but not because we subsidize, but because we have the best product in market.
we want to make sure that we are the product that best fits that type of experience. So that's why we're so optimized on local and on open models today for on-prem, but in the future, it's for all consumers.
I think it's open models. I think the most cost effective solution for a model is going to be the cheap one that you can run locally on your computer.