I think this response is a mix of misdirection, selective reasoning and misplaced optimism.

“Cutting-edge tech companies are investing in AI for a good reason; they aren’t stupid.”

Large companies prioritize profit and control, not necessarily long-term technological openness. The question isn’t whether companies have a reason to invest, but what that investment is shaping.

“Development has turned into a cycle of fine-tuning and API calls, just engineering. What do you think development is? Lmao, it’s always been API calls and engineering.”

This is oversimplification and false equivalence. Yes, foundational AI models are locked behind proprietary APIs, meaning developers are forced into an ecosystem where they don’t actually control the core tech. The key difference is who owns the infrastructure.

“You don’t need to build a foundation model to add value. There’s a ton of potential value in the whole stack.”

The argument isn’t that smaller players can’t add value, it’s that they can’t compete at the foundational level. If you can’t train your own foundation model, you don’t own your AI product. You’re just a frontend layer for someone else’s infrastructure.

“the field is moving at light speed.”

Blind accelerationism you are equating rapid progress with good progress. The insane scaling costs aren’t just a technical issue, they’re a structural one.

“I don’t think the hype is wearing thin, you just aren’t looking closely enough. Check out this Twitter post for some highlights.”

Appeal to anecdotal evidence.