Google was a 1998 start up and Nvidia was founded in 1993 while others like Meta emerged out of the aftermath so yeah some are not technically survivors but what developed out of and after the crash.
I do not know enough about either AI or the dot com crash to know what is happening here but it does seem that USA and China are in a competition for global dominance and USA is placing a lot of its chips on AI as a tool that might perpetuate its legacy global hegemony.
China has already won the trade war- China makes things faster cheaper and more competitively than any of the other industrialised nation can...and pays more for most of the commodities so dominates global trade to a large extent.
AI seems to be at the forefront of the contest between USA and China and could be a deciding factor.
China has taken a significantly different approach to AI than the US and the west more generally.
If China approach proves more effective that could be a deciding factor in the wider contest for dominance.
They actually started changing the approach to be more like the US. For example, Qwen3 Max is proprietary just like Gemini 3. Only the smaller models are open weights (Qwen3 instruct from China, Gemma 3 from the US.. etcetera)
My understanding is that China is directing AI research and development to focus more on immediately practicable applications and avoiding the grand quest of AI consciousness. Has that strategic approach difference changed significantly?
I have not seen that change reported but you may be correct.
China does have an advantage in its huge lead in electricity power supply and cost. USA faces power shortages, price hikes and rolling blackouts if it is to power the projects data centres.
China’s AI Power Play: Cheap Electricity From World’s Biggest Grid- WSJ https://archive.ph/OrJVm
It sounds like you didn't read the WSJ article- it is not comforting. It is however factual, informative and detailed analysis. Your link is about as shallow and narrow an analysis of a complex economic and strategic issue as can be imagined.
I guess you were too busy C&P-ing shit and downzapping, and didn't care to have the conversation before. We could have had it...
We're not in ~Politics_And_Law here though, we're in ~AI. So we assess the products and the actual results, not so much what people are inferring that the CCP wants or does not want. Do you think the CCP wanted to have tens of millions of half-finished cars that sucked all the available subsidy? Come on... there's lots of things that happen in China that is not what "the CCP" wants.. hierarchically. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Back on topic, both Ali and Moonshot have switched from 100% open weights to the Google model of proprietary high-end + open lesser models. Deepseek has had a couple unreleased high-end models too, and only Z.ai has been consistently releasing open weights. How do you explain that from the WSJ article? Does it even mention what the leading Chinese LLM is doing? Or what the leading Chinese model is in the first place? No, it doesn't. It only mentions Deepseek. Why? That's been bested by all 3 main Chinese competitors 8 months ago.
The article tries to distinguish some high level direction to figure out what state is winning in a war that is waged in symbolics only. On the ground all we see is massive progress despite that war. Z.ai (GLM) is doing awesome lately and exclusively training on Huawei Ascend (and thus benefitting from the energy abundance). Moonshot (Kimi) and Deepseek are training exclusively on Nvidia. Ali (Qwen) is unconfirmed to be hybrid. The landscape, also within China, is diverse. There is no single AI strategy. Not in China, not in the US. The strategy of the politicians on both sides of the pacific is to "win", except with AGI gone, no one can tell what they're racing towards.
totally different from dot com bubble
These are not startups with a website and no cash or revenue
True, a lot of them are actually survivors from the dot com crash.
Will they be so lucky this time around?
Let's wait and see...
NVidia, Google, Meta, OpenAI, Anthropic et al are survivors of the .com crash?
Google was a 1998 start up and Nvidia was founded in 1993 while others like Meta emerged out of the aftermath so yeah some are not technically survivors but what developed out of and after the crash.
I do not know enough about either AI or the dot com crash to know what is happening here but it does seem that USA and China are in a competition for global dominance and USA is placing a lot of its chips on AI as a tool that might perpetuate its legacy global hegemony.
China has already won the trade war- China makes things faster cheaper and more competitively than any of the other industrialised nation can...and pays more for most of the commodities so dominates global trade to a large extent.
AI seems to be at the forefront of the contest between USA and China and could be a deciding factor.
China has taken a significantly different approach to AI than the US and the west more generally.
If China approach proves more effective that could be a deciding factor in the wider contest for dominance.
They actually started changing the approach to be more like the US. For example, Qwen3 Max is proprietary just like Gemini 3. Only the smaller models are open weights (Qwen3 instruct from China, Gemma 3 from the US.. etcetera)
My understanding is that China is directing AI research and development to focus more on immediately practicable applications and avoiding the grand quest of AI consciousness.
Has that strategic approach difference changed significantly?
It does both now
I have not seen that change reported but you may be correct.
China does have an advantage in its huge lead in electricity power supply and cost.
USA faces power shortages, price hikes and rolling blackouts if it is to power the projects data centres.
China’s AI Power Play: Cheap Electricity From World’s Biggest Grid- WSJ
https://archive.ph/OrJVm
We're following sources a bit closer to the fire here than WSJ that tries to comfort normies about some thing they don't understand...
#1421164 is the last time we talked about this.
It sounds like you didn't read the WSJ article- it is not comforting. It is however factual, informative and detailed analysis.
Your link is about as shallow and narrow an analysis of a complex economic and strategic issue as can be imagined.
I guess you were too busy C&P-ing shit and downzapping, and didn't care to have the conversation before. We could have had it...
We're not in ~Politics_And_Law here though, we're in ~AI. So we assess the products and the actual results, not so much what people are inferring that the CCP wants or does not want. Do you think the CCP wanted to have tens of millions of half-finished cars that sucked all the available subsidy? Come on... there's lots of things that happen in China that is not what "the CCP" wants.. hierarchically. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Back on topic, both Ali and Moonshot have switched from 100% open weights to the Google model of proprietary high-end + open lesser models. Deepseek has had a couple unreleased high-end models too, and only Z.ai has been consistently releasing open weights. How do you explain that from the WSJ article? Does it even mention what the leading Chinese LLM is doing? Or what the leading Chinese model is in the first place? No, it doesn't. It only mentions Deepseek. Why? That's been bested by all 3 main Chinese competitors 8 months ago.
The article tries to distinguish some high level direction to figure out what state is winning in a war that is waged in symbolics only. On the ground all we see is massive progress despite that war. Z.ai (GLM) is doing awesome lately and exclusively training on Huawei Ascend (and thus benefitting from the energy abundance). Moonshot (Kimi) and Deepseek are training exclusively on Nvidia. Ali (Qwen) is unconfirmed to be hybrid. The landscape, also within China, is diverse. There is no single AI strategy. Not in China, not in the US. The strategy of the politicians on both sides of the pacific is to "win", except with AGI gone, no one can tell what they're racing towards.