The Marketplace of Ideas Is Rigged When It Comes to Artificial Intelligence ⇥ theverge.com

Terrence O’Brien, the Verge:

But this isn’t some fluke, or temporary supply chain problem. Companies are choosing data center clients over ordinary buyers because “the same chip earns far more inside an AI server than inside a consumer device,” according to Srikanth Jagabathula, professor of technology, operations, and statistics at the NYU Stern School of Business. Regardless of whether people are clamoring for more AI, and more AI data centers, or not.

O’Brien frames this question around the recent Apple price increases, but this observation can be generalized in a way that does not require tackling the question of whether the company’s extraordinary margins should cushion its customers against increasing costs. If someone wants to go out and buy a computer right now, they are going to be paying through the nose for any spec above the entry-level. Even if they want to buy a relatively “thin” client, it still needs plenty of RAM — in part because local models need it, itself a part of this issue.

There is, therefore, no way to opt out of this technological push when buying something new. That makes sense if you think of the family of artificial intelligence technologies as a feature, not a product. But it does mean we all end up paying for this explosive market regardless of whether we think any of this is a prudent, sensible, or ethical technology.

Kif Leswing, CNBC:

But while tech giants like Apple and Microsoft, which both announced price hikes this week, have a hefty cash cushion, supply chain leverage and customers numbering in the millions or billions, a much wider swath of businesses face potentially dire straits. Most consumer electronics companies have little margin to spare and can’t confidently raise prices in an economy already grappling with inflationary pressures.

Luke James, Tom’s Hardware:

Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron were sued on June 25th in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, where 17 plaintiffs accuse the three memory makers of illegally coordinating to restrict DRAM supply and inflate prices that the complaint says have risen roughly 700% over four years. The class action, filed as Garciaguirre v. Samsung Electronics and assigned to Judge Noel Wise, invokes Section 1 of the Sherman Act and targets companies that together hold around 90% of the global DRAM market. Samsung and SK hynix have pleaded guilty to criminal DRAM price fixing once before, with the latter paying a $185 million fine in April 2005.

The complaint (PDF) and docket are available on CourtListener which, notably, contains a reminder that these same companies did this before.