this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2025
775 points (99.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

26817 readers
2821 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 21 points 9 hours ago (2 children)
  1. Approach a business.
  2. Request the service or product they provide for free.
  3. Suggest that instead of paying, you'll advertise the fact that you "bought" from them.
  4. Argue that your brand is so awesome that associating with it is valuable enough to substitute for the payment.

Isn't this basically what influencers do?

[–] lightnegative@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

Arguably OpenAI has actual influence unlike anyone calling themselves "influencer", but yes

[–] Shayeta@feddit.org 6 points 9 hours ago

The list of publicly traded influencers is very short.

[–] llama@lemmy.zip 26 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Or you know, buy the chips fair and square, buy the stock fair and square, provide a service that's worth something, and make profit from both transactions.

[–] J92@lemmy.world 11 points 9 hours ago

You just dont understand business!

/s

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 9 points 9 hours ago

It is way more work to provide value than it is to bribe the regulators to agree that you provided value.

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 62 points 19 hours ago (5 children)

Isn't this basically a kind of insider trading? They wouldn't be allowed to buy that stock, knowing that this deal is about to happen, but receiving it as part of the deal is okay? That doesn't feel right to me.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 7 hours ago

The rules about insider trading only exist to make poor people feel better.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago

the SEC does not exist under republican administrations and it only exists to protect rich people under democrat ones, as it has been literally since it was created.

whole goddamn US economy is built around speculation and insider trading trying to get an edge on that speculation

[–] MrSmith@lemmy.world 10 points 10 hours ago

Do you think rule of law exists in the US?

[–] psud@aussie.zone 13 points 11 hours ago

Any deal involving whole percentages of stock will affect the stock price, it's insider trading when you get a call from someone at AMD before the deal is public, so you can profit. It's not insider trading for AMD executives to exercise their stock options (which they already had) to profit from the stock movement they just authorised

[–] genfood@feddit.org 45 points 18 hours ago

Nah, they are rich so it should be fine.

[–] baconsunday@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Was this a real conversation? Jeez lol

[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 4 points 6 hours ago

Matt Levine is a wall Street lawyer who now does opinion pieces for Bloomberg, usually pretty informative and well written. Here's the full piece

https://archive.is/20251009105509/https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2025-10-06/openai-is-good-at-deals

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 37 points 20 hours ago

You’re paid in exposure.

[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 63 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

It's going to be a fucking bloodbath when it bursts.

[–] someacnt@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago

Assuming it ever bursts.. Do the people in power want the bust?

[–] Pat_Riot@lemmy.today 8 points 11 hours ago

It fucking should be. It's been nearly as much an annoyance in my feed as Sovcit Hussein. Death to AI and the bastards trying to shove it down our throats.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 71 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

So basically they're paying in exposure.

There's a mildly amusing bit in there about disrespecting artists and not wanting to pay them money for their work that I'm not a good enough writer to execute (guess I should've asked chatgpt to do that for me and posted the result as my own original work do not steal instead of this nonsense ramble).

[–] Reginald_T_Biter@lemmy.world 42 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I see the vague shape of what you were going for, and had you executed it, I'm sure I would have snorted lightly in mirth.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 40 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

The notion of having had the hypothetical potential to amuse even one person is payment enough for me.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Perhaps you could get AMD to pay you $35 billion for the hypothetical potential of amusement later on.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Nah, that's okay, I REALLY don't want any stocks. That would ruin my reputation in my radical leftist antifa terrorist bubble.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] outerspace@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 hours ago

If they say they are gong to pay artists the stock will not go up

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 38 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

NVIDIA's deal makes much more sense. Will use OpenAI revenue to buy shares in OpenAI and still profit if OpenAI goes bankrupt.

This is less a "vote of confidence" in AMD, because shit is free for OpenAI here. I too will buy all the AMD GPUs if you give me AMD stock of same or greater value. This deal structure actually makes AMD look terrible and unconfident in its product. But deal is not transparent enough.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 237 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You also have the circular investment. NVIDIA puts money into OpenAI. It uses that money to buy computing power from Oracle, who then fills its datacenters with hardware from NVIDIA. Everybody's valuation rises.

Edit: valuation, not validation

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 137 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Insert 2 economists eating shit joke

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] BilSabab@lemmy.world 32 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

If that's ain't gaming system then I don't what is

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 102 points 1 day ago (4 children)

AMD too?

So, assuming that Intel is also on the wrong side of history as usual (and that their cards are actually good for gaming, of which I'm not convinced) , you literally can't buy a decent gaming GPU without paying into the AI nonsense?

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

they're all playing the same game

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Look, the recent CPU lineup had AI in its name, has dedicated cores in it. Because Windows wants to do AI things or whatever.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nope sadly, AI needs GPUs and it makes up the bulk of sales of these chips now.

It would be suicide for any of the companies that could make these processors to not go after the biggest market. The result of a company not doing that would be watching all their competitors grow and advance their products whilst their company's value drops and products stagnate, possibly to a point that recovery to competitiveness would be hard if not impossible.

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 37 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

When AMD's biggest market was Litecoin (and derivatives like Dogecoin) mining and Nvidia's hardware was pants at mining, they initially couldn't increase production of the HD 7000 series quickly enough, so the initial glut of money went to scalpers. They responded by making huge volumes for the Rx 200 series, but shortly after it launched, Litecoin mining ASICs became available and GPU mining stopped being viable. That meant that:

  • they'd spent lots of money manufacturing lots of GPUs.
  • miners were selling used GPUs for a fraction of the retail cost while those cards were still the current generation.
  • people didn't want to buy a new card for several times the price of the same card but used for a few months.
  • retailers had to drop prices to keep selling new cards.
  • wholesale prices had to drop to keep retailers stocking new cards.
  • AMD weren't making any profit when they sold these cards.
  • the RX 300 cards weren't compelling compared to a massively discounted RX 200 card, so they didn't sell in huge quantities or with good margins, either.

This wasn't the only time ATi/AMD took a calculated risk and it backfired horribly, so with their history of bad luck, chasing the AI bubble in any way that involves risk instead of just selling things for money might be a bad idea.

[–] sobchak@programming.dev 4 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

That's how I got a R9 290 for "cheap," and continued to use it for something like 10 years (replaced it just a couple years ago).

The AI cards don't have video-out though :(

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›