日韩中文字幕在线一区二区三区,亚洲热视频在线观看,久久精品午夜一区二区福利,精品一区二区三区在线观看l,麻花传媒剧电影,亚洲香蕉伊综合在人在线,免费av一区二区三区在线,亚洲成在线人视频观看
          首頁 500強 活動 榜單 商業 科技 商潮 專題 品牌中心
          雜志訂閱

          OpenAI又要融資數百億美元,它會變成什么樣子?

          Sharon Goldman
          2025-12-24

          高昂的成本既令人敬畏,也引發了深深的擔憂。

          文本設置
          小號
          默認
          大號
          Plus(0條)

          OpenAI首席執行官薩姆·奧爾特曼(Sam Altman)。圖片來源:Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images

          我將OpenAI比作一棟房屋,但說實話,沒人能確定這棟房屋究竟用什么建造。

          這可是一項昂貴的建筑工程。據報道,OpenAI正以7500億美元估值進行新一輪融資,金額高達數百億美元,其中亞馬遜將投資100億美元。公司在算力方面投入巨額資金——在為AI芯片供電的數據中心澆筑混凝土——公司表示需要繼續構建那座龐大的模型和應用金字塔,目前已有超過8億用戶依賴于此。

          高昂的成本既令人敬畏,也引發了深深的擔憂。業界觀察者把OpenAI擴張比作帝國大廈拔地而起一樣,它的預算增長速度與建筑物本身一樣快。(但真實的帝國大廈按今天的價格計算僅花費約7億美元,而且沒有超出預算。)一些懷疑論者越來越確信,整個建筑群不過是一座傲慢的紀念碑,很快就會轟然倒塌。

          我的看法是:如果OpenAI是一棟房屋,它仍處于建設的早期階段——但沒人能確定它用什么建造。計劃無疑雄心勃勃,推動結構向前所未有的高度發展。這是一棟紙牌屋嗎?是搖搖欲墜的木柱支撐的房屋嗎?還是堅固的混凝土建筑?問題是無論正在建造的結構是什么,它是否真的能承受已經施加在它上面的重量。

          專家觀點分化

          這種不確定性讓我采訪的專家們意見分歧。科技分析師羅布·恩德爾(Rob Enderle)表示,希望看到OpenAI能建立在更穩固的基礎上。“如果他們在基礎方面有更強的根基,我會感覺更放心,”他告訴我,特別強調需要讓產品足夠可信,以促進企業客戶的采用。他補充說,OpenAI在方向上曾一度“偏離軌道”,并指出自2023年11月首席執行官薩姆·奧爾特曼(Sam Altman)短暫被解職后復職以來,公司原有的獨立安全和倫理監督結構已被邊緣化。他認為,如今OpenAI試圖同時與所有人競爭;被動應對競爭對手而不是執行清晰的路線圖;在沒有明確優先級的情況下大量支出。

          正如《財富》雜志本周深度報道所披露,OpenAI首席執行官薩姆·奧爾特曼(Sam Altman)兩周前在公司內部拉響“紅色警報”,部分原因在于他意識到公司可能因試圖同時推進過多項目而分散精力。該報道剖析了OpenAI“紅色警報”的背景、方式和內容,還解釋了為何奧爾特曼警告公司要做好面對“艱難氛圍”和經濟逆風的準備,原因是谷歌和OpenAI競爭加劇。奧爾特曼正試圖激勵團隊在未來幾周內重新聚焦OpenAI的核心ChatGPT產品。但據恩德爾說,這些都是非常被動的,缺乏足夠的戰略性。

          針對該公司持續發布新產品——從新AI模型和新圖像生成模型,到網頁瀏覽器、ChatGPT內置購物功能,再到本周剛推出的應用生態系統——同時推進大規模“星際之門”數據中心建設,恩德爾將OpenAI比作網景(Netscape)等互聯網公司,指出這些公司致富過快,失去了戰略紀律。

          “他們跑得太快,真正關注方向的時間不多,”他說道。

          然而,其他人強烈不同意這種觀點。Futurum Research創始人兼首席執行官丹尼爾·紐曼(Daniel Newman)告訴我,擔心OpenAI的房屋會倒塌,忽略了大局。“這是一個跨越數十年的超級周期,”他說道,將公司當前AI階段比作Netflix的DVD郵寄時代——這是隨后真正范式轉變的前奏。從未滿足需求和長期價值創造的角度來看,紐曼認為OpenAI在算力方面的巨額投資是理性的,而不是魯莽的。

          “我認為OpenAI今天擁有的是高質量的、未來三維模擬和建筑效果圖,”紐曼說道。他補充說,真正的問題是OpenAI能否獲得足夠的市場份額來建造它設想的豪宅。

          “我認為OpenAI的真正目標是成為超級規模企業,”紐曼說道。“他們將擁有基礎設施、應用程序、數據、工作流程、智能工具——人們將從OpenAI購買他們現在從其他地方獲得的一切。這是一個非常雄心勃勃的目標。不能說它會成功。但如果成功了,這些數字是有意義的。”

          尋找粘性或膠水

          最后,我與高德納咨詢公司(Gartner Research)首席分析師阿倫·錢德拉塞卡蘭(Arun Chandrasekaran)交談,他對我的房屋比喻笑了笑,并試圖避開,但愿意討論OpenAI是否至少建立在堅實的基礎上。

          “他們確實發展得非常快,而且做出了任何[同等規模]公司從未做過的巨額承諾,”他說道。“我認為這是一場風險投資,一個不無風險的戰略。”他指出很大程度上取決于他們產品在模型層和應用層的粘性。

          “這取決于從客戶角度的轉換成本,以及其他幾個因素是否能讓增長真正按他們設想的方式實現,”他說道。“你說的是一家高增長公司,但預期是他們必須以比現在更快的速度增長。期望是巨大的。”

          “粘性,”我說道。“像膠水?像釘子?支撐房屋的東西?”

          他笑了。“是的——像膠水。我說粘性,你說膠水。”(財富中文網)

          譯者:中慧言-王芳

          我將OpenAI比作一棟房屋,但說實話,沒人能確定這棟房屋究竟用什么建造。

          這可是一項昂貴的建筑工程。據報道,OpenAI正以7500億美元估值進行新一輪融資,金額高達數百億美元,其中亞馬遜將投資100億美元。公司在算力方面投入巨額資金——在為AI芯片供電的數據中心澆筑混凝土——公司表示需要繼續構建那座龐大的模型和應用金字塔,目前已有超過8億用戶依賴于此。

          高昂的成本既令人敬畏,也引發了深深的擔憂。業界觀察者把OpenAI擴張比作帝國大廈拔地而起一樣,它的預算增長速度與建筑物本身一樣快。(但真實的帝國大廈按今天的價格計算僅花費約7億美元,而且沒有超出預算。)一些懷疑論者越來越確信,整個建筑群不過是一座傲慢的紀念碑,很快就會轟然倒塌。

          我的看法是:如果OpenAI是一棟房屋,它仍處于建設的早期階段——但沒人能確定它用什么建造。計劃無疑雄心勃勃,推動結構向前所未有的高度發展。這是一棟紙牌屋嗎?是搖搖欲墜的木柱支撐的房屋嗎?還是堅固的混凝土建筑?問題是無論正在建造的結構是什么,它是否真的能承受已經施加在它上面的重量。

          專家觀點分化

          這種不確定性讓我采訪的專家們意見分歧。科技分析師羅布·恩德爾(Rob Enderle)表示,希望看到OpenAI能建立在更穩固的基礎上。“如果他們在基礎方面有更強的根基,我會感覺更放心,”他告訴我,特別強調需要讓產品足夠可信,以促進企業客戶的采用。他補充說,OpenAI在方向上曾一度“偏離軌道”,并指出自2023年11月首席執行官薩姆·奧爾特曼(Sam Altman)短暫被解職后復職以來,公司原有的獨立安全和倫理監督結構已被邊緣化。他認為,如今OpenAI試圖同時與所有人競爭;被動應對競爭對手而不是執行清晰的路線圖;在沒有明確優先級的情況下大量支出。

          正如《財富》雜志本周深度報道所披露,OpenAI首席執行官薩姆·奧爾特曼(Sam Altman)兩周前在公司內部拉響“紅色警報”,部分原因在于他意識到公司可能因試圖同時推進過多項目而分散精力。該報道剖析了OpenAI“紅色警報”的背景、方式和內容,還解釋了為何奧爾特曼警告公司要做好面對“艱難氛圍”和經濟逆風的準備,原因是谷歌和OpenAI競爭加劇。奧爾特曼正試圖激勵團隊在未來幾周內重新聚焦OpenAI的核心ChatGPT產品。但據恩德爾說,這些都是非常被動的,缺乏足夠的戰略性。

          針對該公司持續發布新產品——從新AI模型和新圖像生成模型,到網頁瀏覽器、ChatGPT內置購物功能,再到本周剛推出的應用生態系統——同時推進大規模“星際之門”數據中心建設,恩德爾將OpenAI比作網景(Netscape)等互聯網公司,指出這些公司致富過快,失去了戰略紀律。

          “他們跑得太快,真正關注方向的時間不多,”他說道。

          然而,其他人強烈不同意這種觀點。Futurum Research創始人兼首席執行官丹尼爾·紐曼(Daniel Newman)告訴我,擔心OpenAI的房屋會倒塌,忽略了大局。“這是一個跨越數十年的超級周期,”他說道,將公司當前AI階段比作Netflix的DVD郵寄時代——這是隨后真正范式轉變的前奏。從未滿足需求和長期價值創造的角度來看,紐曼認為OpenAI在算力方面的巨額投資是理性的,而不是魯莽的。

          “我認為OpenAI今天擁有的是高質量的、未來三維模擬和建筑效果圖,”紐曼說道。他補充說,真正的問題是OpenAI能否獲得足夠的市場份額來建造它設想的豪宅。

          “我認為OpenAI的真正目標是成為超級規模企業,”紐曼說道。“他們將擁有基礎設施、應用程序、數據、工作流程、智能工具——人們將從OpenAI購買他們現在從其他地方獲得的一切。這是一個非常雄心勃勃的目標。不能說它會成功。但如果成功了,這些數字是有意義的。”

          尋找粘性或膠水

          最后,我與高德納咨詢公司(Gartner Research)首席分析師阿倫·錢德拉塞卡蘭(Arun Chandrasekaran)交談,他對我的房屋比喻笑了笑,并試圖避開,但愿意討論OpenAI是否至少建立在堅實的基礎上。

          “他們確實發展得非常快,而且做出了任何[同等規模]公司從未做過的巨額承諾,”他說道。“我認為這是一場風險投資,一個不無風險的戰略。”他指出很大程度上取決于他們產品在模型層和應用層的粘性。

          “這取決于從客戶角度的轉換成本,以及其他幾個因素是否能讓增長真正按他們設想的方式實現,”他說道。“你說的是一家高增長公司,但預期是他們必須以比現在更快的速度增長。期望是巨大的。”

          “粘性,”我說道。“像膠水?像釘子?支撐房屋的東西?”

          他笑了。“是的——像膠水。我說粘性,你說膠水。”(財富中文網)

          譯者:中慧言-王芳

          Welcome to Eye on AI, with AI reporter Sharon Goldman. In this edition, I compare OpenAI to a house made of…well, no one really knows. Also: OpenAI launches a ChatGPT app store (we'll see if it fares better than their previous custom GPT store)…Anthropic taps Trump-linked Bitcoin miner for a massive AI power build…Anthropic's Claude ran a snack operation in the Wall Street Journal newsroom…NOAA says its new AI-driven weather models improve forecast speed and accuracy…Google debuts a surprisingly powerful Flash version of its Gemini 3 model…and the U.K. AI Safety Institute finds that a large percentage of Britons have used chatbots for emotional support.

          Talk about an expensive building project. OpenAI is reportedly raising tens of fresh billions at a 750billionvaluation,including750 billion valuation, including 10 billion from Amazon. It is pouring money into compute — and literally pouring concrete into the data centers that power AI chips—which the company says it needs to keep constructing the towering stack of models and applications that more than 800 million users now rely on.

          The cost has inspired both awe and deep unease. Industry observers watch OpenAI's expansion the way they might watch the Empire State Building rise — with a budget that keeps climbing as fast as the structure itself. (The actual Empire State Building, it's important to note, only cost about $700 million in today's money and came in under budget.) And some skeptics are increasingly convinced that the entire edifice is a monument to hubris that will come tumbling down before long.

          Here's how I think about it: If OpenAI is a house, it's still in the early stages of construction — but no one agrees what it's made of. The plans are undeniably ambitious, pushing the structure to unprecedented heights. Is this a house made of cards? Of teetering wooden pillars? Of solid concrete? The question is whether whatever structure is being built can actually hold the weight already being placed on it.

          The experts are split

          That uncertainty has split the experts I've spoken to. Technology analyst Rob Enderle said he would like to see OpenAI resting on a firmer foundation. “I would feel much more comfortable if they had a much stronger base in some of the basics,” he told me, particularly around making products trustworthy enough for enterprise businesses to increase adoption. He added that OpenAI has at times “gone off the rails” in terms of direction, pointing out that the company's original independent safety and ethics oversight structures have been sidelined since CEO Sam Altman was reinstated after being briefly fired in November 2023. These days, he argued, OpenAI is trying to compete with everyone at once; reacting to rivals rather than executing a clear roadmap; and spending heavily without clear prioritization.

          A recognition that it may have become distracted by trying to do much at once was part of the reason OpenAI CEO Sam Altman declared a “code red” at the company two weeks ago, as Fortune reported in an in-depth new feature this week. The story looks at the why, the how, and the what of OpenAI's “code red” and why Altman has warned the company to brace for “rough vibes” and economic headwinds in the face of increased competition from Google and OpenAI. Altman is trying to light a fire under his team to refocus on OpenAI's core ChatGPT offerings over the coming weeks. But, according to Enderle, this is all very reactive and not strategic enough.

          Commenting on the company's constant shipping — from new AI models and a new image generation model, to a web browser, shopping features inside ChatGPT, and a new app ecosystem launched just this week — alongside a massive Stargate data-center buildout, Enderle compared OpenAI to Netscape and other dot-com companies that got rich too fast and lost strategic discipline.

          “They're running so fast, they're not really focusing on direction very much,” he said.

          Others, however, strongly disagree. Futurum Research founder and CEO Daniel Newman told me that concerns about OpenAI's house collapsing miss the bigger picture. “This is a multi-decade supercycle,” he said, likening the company's current phase of AI to Netflix's DVD-by-mail era — a precursor to the true paradigm shift that followed. From the perspective of unmet demand and long-term value creation, Newman believes OpenAI's massive compute investments are rational, not reckless.

          “I would call what [OpenAI] has today very high-quality three-dimensional simulations and architectural renderings of a future,” Newman said. The real question, he added, is whether OpenAI can win enough market share to build the mansion it's envisioning.

          “I think OpenAI's real goal is to become a hyperscaler,” Newman said. “They'll have the infrastructure, the applications, the data, the workflows, the agentic tools — and people will buy everything they now get elsewhere from OpenAI instead. It's an incredibly ambitious goal. There's nothing to say it will work. But if it does, the numbers make sense.”

          Searching for stickiness, or glue

          Lastly, I spoke to Arun Chandrasekaran, principal analyst at Gartner Research, who chuckled and ducked away from my house metaphor, but was willing to address whether OpenAI was at least building on solid ground.

          “They are indeed growing really fast, and they are making an enormous amount of commitments far beyond what any company [of their size] has ever made,” he said. “It is a risky bet, I would argue, a strategy that does not come without risks.” A lot of it is predicated on how sticky their products are, he pointed out, both at the model and application layer.

          “It depends on the switching costs from a customer perspective, and a few other factors in terms of whether the growth really pans out the way they've envisioned,” he said. “You're talking about a high growth company, but the expectation is that they're going to have to grow at a much faster clip than what they're growing. The expectations are enormous.”

          Stickiness, I said. Like glue? Nails? Something to hold the house up?

          He laughed. “Yes — like glue. I say stickiness, you say glue.”

          財富中文網所刊載內容之知識產權為財富媒體知識產權有限公司及/或相關權利人專屬所有或持有。未經許可,禁止進行轉載、摘編、復制及建立鏡像等任何使用。
          0條Plus
          精彩評論
          評論

          撰寫或查看更多評論

          請打開財富Plus APP

          前往打開