6 ms·

But translations don't require anything close to SOTA level models. Translations will be high volume, low margin transactions. That will not save Anthropic.

carlosjobim 24d ago
Maybe not Anthropic, but LLM translations has a value counted in the trillions of dollars easily.
- tock 24d ago
  I see it's important but trillions? How did you quantify that number?
  - carlosjobim 23d ago
    Tourism and travel is 10% of global GDP, or about 10 trillion dollars. And it's not the only sector where translation between languages is a benefit. However, I am not sure that the trillions of dollars of value from LLM translation in the coming few years will translate into trillions of dollars of income for the AI companies.
    - tock 23d ago
      Yep translation is going to be a free feature on all devices using on-device LLMs. I see no revenue flowing to AI companies.
      - carlosjobim 23d ago
        Commercial grade translation between dozens of languages would take enormous amounts of disk space. But we'll see. Text editing tools are included on all digital devices, yet companies pay for commercial solutions like MS Office. Cameras and basic image editing tools are included on all smart phones, yet there are millions of advertising agencies around the world. And so on.
        tock 23d ago
        LLM frontier companies are more akin to infrastructure like chips and airplanes and the internet than applications built on top of it. There will be products built on top of them that generate revenue. eg. processors are needed for everything on the planet. No Intel isn't going to generate annual revenue in the trillions because of that. In the case of frontier companies the moat is even smaller with dozens of players competing. LLMs will become a low-cost commodity. You meanwhile can make billions building applications using them though.
        carlosjobim 22d ago
        > eg. processors are needed for everything on the planet. No Intel isn't going to generate annual revenue in the trillions because of that. No, but Intel processors are going to generate revenue in the trillions for the economy, which was the original question as far as I understood it.

carlosjobim 24d ago

Maybe not Anthropic, but LLM translations has a value counted in the trillions of dollars easily.

tock 24d ago
I see it's important but trillions? How did you quantify that number?
- carlosjobim 23d ago
  Tourism and travel is 10% of global GDP, or about 10 trillion dollars. And it's not the only sector where translation between languages is a benefit. However, I am not sure that the trillions of dollars of value from LLM translation in the coming few years will translate into trillions of dollars of income for the AI companies.
  - tock 23d ago
    Yep translation is going to be a free feature on all devices using on-device LLMs. I see no revenue flowing to AI companies.
    - carlosjobim 23d ago
      Commercial grade translation between dozens of languages would take enormous amounts of disk space. But we'll see. Text editing tools are included on all digital devices, yet companies pay for commercial solutions like MS Office. Cameras and basic image editing tools are included on all smart phones, yet there are millions of advertising agencies around the world. And so on.
      - tock 23d ago
        LLM frontier companies are more akin to infrastructure like chips and airplanes and the internet than applications built on top of it. There will be products built on top of them that generate revenue. eg. processors are needed for everything on the planet. No Intel isn't going to generate annual revenue in the trillions because of that. In the case of frontier companies the moat is even smaller with dozens of players competing. LLMs will become a low-cost commodity. You meanwhile can make billions building applications using them though.
        carlosjobim 22d ago
        > eg. processors are needed for everything on the planet. No Intel isn't going to generate annual revenue in the trillions because of that. No, but Intel processors are going to generate revenue in the trillions for the economy, which was the original question as far as I understood it.