cant wait for their debt calls and they have to sell their inventory to make payment.
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
275 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
87695 readers
2784 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
sigh I just wanna upgrade my video card, man
Intel must be kicking themselves for not using their own fabs for Arc, AND divesting from Micron, Optane, and HMC.
Apple and others must be too, for snubbing Intel and Samsung.
They would be making money hand over fist, and relieving the market at the same time.
My new gaming PC that I bought about 18 months ago went up in value by 75% based on its RAM and GPU price and while I'm relieved I got it when I did, that's pure insanity that a PC would appreciate in value
Well, this may explain why my work computer has been on back order for the 4 months that I have had my job. Still have no idea when I’m actually going to get it.
I'm convinced that OpenAI buisness model is to create AI bubble, to sell its "reserved memory wafers" and now Macs, at the top of ram extortion pricing moment.
That same thought just occurred to me: hype a McGuffin and get investors to lend you insane amounts of money which you then use to buy up a marker, causing artificial scarcity, then sell at massive profits.
Seems like Apple‘s little gambit to be immune to AI price fixing savagery didn’t work as well as they thought it would…
I guess Rosetta 2 was just too good…
Apple‘s little gambit to be immune to AI price fixing savagery
I don't think it was ever a strategy. If it was they would've stopped mac's from ever reaching OpenAI's datacenters. Or atleast they'd have prevented them from hoarding so much of the M5 production.
But they did. For a while…
Rosetta 2 is irrelevant here because they'd just compile their shit for ARM for better performance.
At least unlike B300s, these can one day be used if OpenAI dumps them on the used market. IF they do that instead of trashing them to make sure everything stays expensive.
True, but getting there probably involves using Rosetta 2 to arrive at a solution for taking full advantage of the Apple Silicon SoC memory exchanges and other Apple proprietary stuff. Those chips aren’t bog-standard ARM chips and the Asahi Project (bless their hearts) have barely broken into the M3 chips— so… if OpenAI are leveraging Apple Silicon from the last year or 2, they’re building out their own solution using Rosetta as some sort of bridge.
Edit: which also means they must be getting help from Apple directly, ew. And that really pisses me off, because I have long maintained that Rosetta should be open-sourced.
I don't understand why Rosetta has to be involved in any way at all.
Apple provides APIs for programming low level GPU instructions, including AI workloads, on their chips, using the Metal API. Anyone interested in using Apple hardware to its full potential can just write Mac-native software, same as any other MacOS native software directly compiled as binaries to run on Mac M series chips. No Rosetta required for translating x86 instructions to ARM, when the whole thing compiles for Apple's native instructions in the first place.
Uhh, you’re skipping a few steps
Steps that either would not work between architectures or that Rosetta would handle (thereby answering your own question)
And I’m not here to teach a computer science class
Steps that either would not work between architectures or that Rosetta would handle (thereby answering your own question)
What? They would compile the code that they control for the M-series architectures. The target architecture is M-series ARM chips running on MacOS.
Rosetta is for translating x86 to ARM. Which wouldn't be necessary because there are no x86 binaries involved at all.
Oh, I guess you’re right about that
My mistake
No, @GamingChairModel@lemmy.world is right.
What does Rosetta have anything to do with what OpenAI needs? Machine learning on Macs is done in MLX or something else with Metal, running OSX. Most agenic frameworks or other ML-related infrastructure are just Python, or open code that can compile on OSX/Macs just fine. In fact, OSX is often the first target platform.
This even includes inter-node frameworks for clustering Macs together.
No one doing "AI" on Macs is using Rosetta. There's no point, and its a bad idea. They're doing everything in OSX, which works fine, and I can't imagine what OpenAI would be doing with them that wouldn't work in OSX.
But maybe I'm missing what you're implying here. And I'm sorry to come off as thorny, but condescending comments like "I’m not here to teach a computer science class" rub me the wrong way.
If you don’t know, then you are really not in a position to say that I’m wrong LMAO
Have fun with your little “my ignorance is proof that I’m right!” concept, lol
Oh, and the fact that you even brought “AI” into the conversation is hilarious
The two of you should get together and do a stand-up routine called “I and O my God I have no idea what I’m talking about”
You didn't answer my question.
What does rosetta have to do with any of this?
Smells like 'Open’AI is digging another moat where there is none, like it did with the memory wafer deal that started RAMageddon. Heaven forbid people actually being able to run local models, can’t run local models if 'Open’AI has bought all the capable smaller machines, taps head. Fuck SamA and his market cornering with a rusty chainsaw. I guess they think all they have to do is keep that moat somehow until IPO and then it’s somebody else’s problem, they and their investors cash out. Dear Goddess I hope it blows up in their faces.
Ah, I see you’ve stumbled across the real reason for the “AI boom”.
Hint: it’s not because the models are SO incredible. It’s the fascists taking computers away from us so we can’t stifle them. So we can’t talk shit on billionaires anymore. So we can’t fundraise for a better world.
Just like our cars and our traffic lights watch our every move. Just like our phones have 100 sensors that profile us from the moment we wake up.
Demons took the wheel a long time ago.
Yeah, I've had the thought. 'What are we going to do with all that compute now that AI as worker replacement is a bust? Why not run panopticon and get rid of that pesky general compute in the hands of the masses?'
Centralizing compute has been tried again and again, initially mainframes, then the home PC, thin client / server, cloud compute, arguably phones (as apps processing in the cloud), Geforce Now, AI. So far it’s always gone back to the edge for most of the population, except for niche cases (or not in the case of phones, but they turned into general, if locked down, compute), good chance it won't stick this time either.
OpenAI buying tens of thousands of Macs for AI is the funniest possible plot twist: spend years convincing everyone the cloud is the future, then discover the hottest AI infrastructure is basically a warehouse full of Mac minis. Somewhere, an IT admin is whispering: »I told you so.«
What exactly do you think a cloud is? It's built exactly like that, computers connected and orchestrated to run a client's arbitrary services.
Now the interesting thing here is to choose many different types of smallscale hardware. Must be some fun to administrate.
Exactly. It’s super uncommon to use standard consumer hardware to build a data center.
load more comments
(8 replies)
At this point it's pretty blatant that OpenAI are engaging in price fixing more than they are actually delivering AI datacentres.
Has the computers for local AI become that good?
No, no, they have not.
I did the math the other day, and the cost of the mac versus the token rate that you get off of it for a decent model would take you over 70 years of 100% 24/7/365 usage to pay for itself versus just using hosted inference.
They are wildly poor options for local AI models, at least on a cost basis. If you don't care about spending $10,000 to run a halfway okay model at 100x the cost, then go for it.
Does that include energy usage (which I would think Apple being in the top 5 of being energy efficient) and just for AI? I’m sure most would be doing more than just hosting and running a single model.
You could include energy usage in the equation, but if you're buying a $10,000 Mac Studio to edit your PDFs and watch YouTube, then that's your own decision. That's also not what we're talking about here.
The Mac is still going to be incredibly energy efficient.
Let's break it down for Qwen 3.5 MoE.
- M4 Ultra Mac Studio:
- 22t/s
- ~ 210Wh
- 9.55 watts per token/s
- B300 GPU:
- ~ 2160t/s per GPU
- ~ 1750Wh (14Kwh 8 GPU System)
- 0.88 watts per tokens/s
The Mac Studio comes out using ~ 11-12x more energy per token. Making it extremely energy inefficient at this task in comparison.
Not saying it wasn’t implied but didn’t offer it in my original comment but yeah, that’s what I’m talking about. It’s a computer, PC, desktop, workstation…… mostly like someone would be doing other things instead of just AI. You might be talking about just AI on the Mac Studio. To be fair, neither of us clarified our standings, till I ask further questions based on on my original comment. So you’re not wrong, just not what I was getting at. Thanks for sharing though.
Well local models are getting better. Open weight models are a real thread to their business. OpenAI's prices certainly wouldn't stay that low if they were the only player. Their prices are not profitable at the moment anyway.
They really aren't.
Have you used open weight models for serious jobs? Ones that you can actually run effectively on a Mac studio? (Not deepseek v4 pro, not Kimi K3, not GLM 5.3)
They work alright, at best, sometimes.
And the ones you can't run effectively, locally, like Kimi K3 are considerably better at demanding tasks like software engineering. But even then they still suck at that job compared to frontier Anthropic and OpenAI models. I've been building with all of the above, and the open weight models just overall suck at serious high demand software workloads.
I just tried some local llm on my gaming rig, sufficient for chat and images.
But buying the rig just for this is most likely not worth it.
Macs, in particular, are likely to be the best option at the moment, unless you absolutely need the largest Frontier models.
load more comments
(5 replies)
view more: next ›