Lots of other versions exist including reputable ones like Intel’s MKL. The hard part isn’t reimplementing it, it’s validating the output across a massive corpus of scientific work.
BLAS is an example though, it’s the tip of an iceberg.
Argh, we first ignored the fact that most of its income comes from being the lead e-commerce retailer to just focus on AWS and then we need to discount the fact that the majority of AWS is CapEx towards hardware / datacenter (expected CapEx this coming year is $200B), to just leave the software. Whatever.
One thing is for sure: if the seal builds and manages hundreds of billions of dollars worth of computer infrastructure across seven continents, it isn’t just a software company.
What systemic reason can allow this to go on for so long? I obviously discount a lot of the forward looking promises given the track record. Something seems deeply off for 6 years.
6 years may be a _bit_ long, but I think it has probably been kept going longer than it otherwise would by the current AI bubble, after the EV bubble fizzled (while EVs are a real industry they no longer drive super-high valuations). The likes of AOL maintained very high PE ratios for some years during the dot-com bubble, as did Enron, say.
The big question is can Tesla find yet _another_ bubble to jump to after the AI one pops. Watch out for Musk starting to say the word 'quantum' a lot.
I see it as a coup on the company. You have owners who get a skim off the top who probably set it up well at the start. Then you have Xth generation of job maintainers who now run the company and don't see much good reason to make the company prosper as it could effect their career growth/stability. Politics wins out over engineering when the original visionaries hand over the wheel. Owners are too wealthy to care too much, they can sell and retire at any moment.
reply