Alex Imas

Yeah.

I was going to make a point, and I realize it's a fallacy, but the reason it's a fallacy is interesting.

So I was going to say...

I mean, it's just hard to imagine a world where there's trillions upon trillions of robots, but there's only some billion odd humans.

And then like the cumulative amount we're spending on robots and like building more robots and whatever is less than what we're spending to like pay, you know, Magnus Carlsen.

Or podcasters or whatever.

Or podcasters.

But then I realized that's a fallacy.

The number of transistors in the world has like literally, certainly trillion X, maybe quadrillion X or something.

And your colleague, Chad Jones, has a very interesting result about how the...

share of the economy that is going towards paying for computing basically, like paying for the transistors, has been decreasing.

The point that you made is that one way to think about Moore's law

What sets price?

Well, the price is a supply and demand.

And so not only are we producing more transistors more cheaply, but also the value of the marginal transistor is decreasing.

And this is, in fact, literally relevant to a conversation about AI where maybe for the first time, this is no longer true.

Right.

So the famous fact here is that an H100 costs more to rent now than it did three years ago, even though we have much superior technology and we have much more compute in the world.

Because...

As models get smarter, the opportunity cost of compute gets higher.