[yousif_123123]

Not good. This shouldn't be allowed. What would be better is if groq and cerebras combined, and maybe other companies invested in them to help them scale. Why would the major cloud providers not lobby against this?

Usually antitrust is for consumers, but here I think companies like Microsoft and AWS would be the biggest beneficiaries of having more AI chip competition.

[aurareturn]

Groq is absolutely tiny. I don't think antitrust is an issue here.

[jeromegv]

20 billions is tiny?

[frozenport]

>> if groq and cerebras combined

There isn't to be shared between the two techs, Groq's hardware is a like a railgun that installs all the weights into the optimal location before firing off an inference. Cerebras computer engineering more convention requiring the same data movement that GPUs struggle with optimizing.

Suspect Groq is complementary/superior to nvidia's GPUs, while it is unclear what Cerebras brings other then maybe some deals with TSMC.

[bubblethink]

They are both SRAM based solutions currently with the same benefits and pitfalls.

[nabla9]

It's a non-exclusive deal.

No reason for antitrust action whatsoever.

[danny_codes]

That’s a loophole. Regulation hasn’t caught up to the innovation of non-exclusive licensing deal. Hopefully we’ll get some competence back in government soon-ish and can rectify the mistake

[siliconc0w]

It's a backdoor acquisition by looting the key talent.

[zipy124]

Non exclusive deal but also acquiring a lot of the staff, which seems pretty exclusive in that term.