Thread regarding IBM layoffs

Krishna On AI Infra Spend

Arvind Krishna on AI infrastructure spending:

“The infrastructure build-out is a bit ahead.

By my math, about 1 gigawatt of power costs roughly $60 billion to $80 billion in semiconductors to populate. So if people have committed to more than 100 gigawatts of AI data center build-out, that points to $6 trillion to $8 trillion in total investment.

If that requires a five to seven year payback, the industry would need an extra $1 trillion to $2 trillion a year in revenue. Even at high margins, that margin might be 20% to 30%. I don’t believe that much incremental revenue is there.

That’s why I think the build-out is a bit ahead.

I also believe many of the largest AI models will become commodities. Commodities can have a lot of value, but they usually have low switching costs. And if switching costs are low, margins may exist, but they won’t come with a massive moat.

So perhaps there won’t be half a dozen to a dozen companies that can build the largest models and survive. Maybe it’s two or three.

That raises the question of how much capital expenditure can realistically go into data centers. If the build-out were half of what we’re seeing today, I’d say it makes complete sense. But when it’s double that, some players may not be able to generate a strong return.”


by
| 5 views | | 15 replies (last 4 hours ago) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kvrfs2nc

15 replies (most recent on top)

@d0 There is no "Quantum chip technology race". Quantum computing is a scientific research project that likely won't culminate in any sort of commercially viable product for another 20-30 years MINIMUM. The press releases stating 3-5 years are just hype for uneducated investors.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d9+1kvrfs2nc

Even though he might raised some good points and i'm also wondering how all these investments in AI Data Centers are going to be turned into profit without truly eliminating massive amounts of jobs. As i think, you have to replace the GPUs, TPUs or whatever within like 3-5 years.

However i think the true reason for these comments is:

  • damage control over what was released over "a global study IBM released on June 17 found that 91% of enterprise executives do not fully understand their own AI dependencies and feel trapped in systems they cannot easily change."
  • aka no clear ROI, now stating AI saved 4.5 billion over 3 years. And we all know how these calculations are done. Take anything at least a little bit or indirectly connected to AI and count it in.
  • PR circus for WS and investors to hide the incompetence - not part of the hype, so downgrade it a little
  • same as Quantum, Arvind trying to turn the eye of Sauron from AI, in which IBM lost the game on all levels (and they should be happy that are part of the Glasswing project so they fix their products, steal/monetize on somebody elses work) trying move the hype on Quantum to please the investors
  • All in all, all of those PR bullsh-ts are being made to potentially increase the stock price

= assuring his fat bonus check, otherwise he don't care about the company at all, once and soon as he leaves, he and his companions are just trying to get as much as possible for themselves before they retire/leave.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d7+1kvrfs2nc

@cv you said it !

But wait, there's more - IBM will be left in the dust for the Quantum chip technology race next. When you have a company run by losers like Arvind and his Pipmunks, you cannot help but wonder for how long they will be in business. Nothing but a bunch of overpaid executives who fail to deliver on their promises every single time.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d0+1kvrfs2nc

Classic bullsh-t disguised as an opinion on AI

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cy+1kvrfs2nc

This is just one long rambling excuse about why IBM has completely been left in the dust in the AI market and doesn't even remotely have any sort of compelling offering here.

Arvind is completely irrelevant amongst tech leaders. Ever notice that he is NEVER pictured with the other Tech CEOs in the media? Now it's possible that it's because those pictures tend to be cropped at about waist height so he simply isn't visible, but I'd bet on a different reason - the irrelevancy of IBM in modern tech.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cv+1kvrfs2nc

@bm I wouldn't trust Arvind Krishna to sit the right way on a toilet seat, let alone use the toilet properly.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ce+1kvrfs2nc

I wouldn't trust Arvind Krishna to change the light bulb in my kitchen, yet alone talk about anything in tech.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bm+1kvrfs2nc

@OP :

Same perspective can be applied to Quantum computing and then he can he heard saying - I don’t believe that much incremental revenue is there.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @be+1kvrfs2nc

Link to snippet of the interview from where the OP got the quote --

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZv3jkcpon3/

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b7+1kvrfs2nc

Arvind is an arrogant id--t who is jealous of other much better run firms with deeper pockets who can make the big AI investments so he has to throw stones to justify just how badly he has torn down IBM into a clown show. At 64 he getting senile now and 4 years past IBM's unstated rule of retiring at 60. I cannot wait to see this channel light up like a Christmas tree when he does leave and Robbie Thomas becomes IBM Head Cheerleader. THAT WILL BE EPIC!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b0+1kvrfs2nc

Arvind isn't saying AI is useless. He's saying investors should do the math instead of getting caught up in hype. That's called being a responsible CEO. When everyone else is talking about unlimited demand and endless growth, Arvind is asking whether trillions in infrastructure spending can realistically generate enough revenue to justify the investment. That's not anti-AI—it's basic business discipline.

He's also probably right that many large language models will become commodities. History is full of examples where the underlying technology became widely available and the real value shifted to execution, integration, data, customer relationships, and enterprise adoption. IBM has spent decades helping businesses solve real problems, not chasing every shiny object.

I'd rather have a CEO who asks hard questions about return on investment than one who blindly throws shareholder money at the latest trend. Markets reward hype in the short term. They reward sound economics in the long term. Mr. Krishna is reminding people that eventually the bills come due

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @am+1kvrfs2nc

@a7 and it is a fool's errand.

That's why Arvind has it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a8+1kvrfs2nc

This feels like a fool’s errand

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a7+1kvrfs2nc

Aren't there already 2-3 companies building the large models, the ones that matter anyway... xAI, OpenAI and Antropic... The rest are irrelevant... IBM is certainly not part of the group!

But I agree that these models will become commodity very quick and it is hard to see how these companies will make revenues that compensate for all the investments.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1kvrfs2nc

Hes always wrong

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a1+1kvrfs2nc

Post a reply

: