Generative AI has been a hot topic, especially after the launch of ChatGPT by OpenAI. It has even exceeded Metaverse in popularity. From top tech firms like Google, Microsoft and Adobe to chipmakers like Qualcomm, Intel, and NVIDIA, all are integrating generative AI models in their products and services. So, why is generative AI attracting interest from all these companies?
While generative AI and ChatGPT are both used for generating content, what are the key differences between them? The content generated can include solutions to problems, essays, email or resume templates, or a short summary of a big report to name a few. But it also poses certain challenges like training complexity, bias, deep fakes, intellectual property rights, and so on.
In the latest episode of ‘The Counterpoint Podcast’, hostMaurice Klaehneis joined by Counterpoint Associate DirectorMohit Agrawaland Senior AnalystAkshara Bassito talk about generative AI. The discussion covers topics including the ecosystem, companies that are active in the generative AI space, challenges, infrastructure, and hardware. It also focuses on emerging opportunities and how the ecosystem could evolve going forward.
OpenAI, Midjourney and Microsoft have set the bar for chargeable generative AI services withChatGPT(GPT-4) and Midjourney costing $20 per month and Microsoft charging $30 per month for Copilot. The $20-per-month benchmark set by these early movers is also being used bygenerativeAI start-ups to raise money at ludicrous valuations from investors hit by the current AI FOMO craze. But I suspect the reality is that it will end up being more like $20 a year.
To be fair, if one can charge $20 per month, have 6 million or more users, and run inference onNVIDIA’slatest hardware, then a lot of money can be made. If one then moves inference from thecloudto the end device, even more is possible as the cost of compute for inference will be transferred to the user. Furthermore, this is a better solution for data security and privacy as the user’s data in the form of requests and prompt priming will remain on the device and not transferred to the public cloud. This is why it can be concluded that for services that run at scale and for the enterprise, almost all generative AI inference will be run on the user’s hardware, be it asmartphone, PC or a private cloud.
Consequently, assuming that there is no price erosion and endless demand, the business cases being touted to raise money certainly hold water. While the demand is likely to be very strong, I am more concerned with price erosion. This is because outside of money to rent compute, there are not many barriers to entry andMeta唯一真正obstac平台已经删除le to everyone piling in.
The starting point for a generative AI service is a foundation model which is then tweaked and trained byhumansto create the service desired. However, foundation models are difficult and expensive to design and cost a lot of money to train in terms of compute power. Up until March this year, there were no trained foundation models widely available, but that changed when Meta Platforms’ family of LlaMa models “leaked” online. Now it has become the gold standard for any hobbyist, tinkerer or start-up looking for a cheap way to get going.
Foundation models are difficult to switch out, which means that Meta Platforms now controls anAIstandard in its own right, similar to the way OpenAI controls ChatGPT. However, the fact that it is freely available online has meant that any number of AI services for generating text or images are now freely available without any of the constraints or costs being applied to the larger models.
Furthermore, some of the other better-known start-ups such as Anthropic are making their bestservicesavailable online for free. Claude 2 is arguably better than OpenAI’s paid ChatGPT service and so it is not impossible that many people notice and start to switch.
Another problem with generativeAIservices is that outside of foundation models, there are almost no switching costs to move from one service to another. The net result of this is that freely available models from the open-source community combined with start-ups, which need to get volume for their newly launched services, are going to start eroding the price of the services. This is likely to be followed by a race to the bottom, meaning that the real price ends up being more like $20 per year rather than $20 per month. It is at this point that the FOMO is likely to come unstuck as start-ups and generative AI companies will start missing their targets, leading to down rounds, falling valuations, and so on.
There are plenty of real-world use cases for generativeAI, meaning that it is not the fundamentals that are likely to crack but merely the hype and excitement that surrounds them. This is precisely what has happened to theMetaversewhere very little has changed in terms of developments or progress over the last 12 months, but now no one seems to care about it.
(This is a version of a blog that first appeared on Radio Free Mobile. All views expressed are Richard’s own.)
Cloud service providers’ capex is expected to grow by around 8% YoYin 2023 due to investments in AI and networking equipment.
Microsoft and Amazon are among the highest spenders as they invest in data center development. Microsoft will spend over 13% of its capex on AI infrastructure.
AI infrastructure can be 10x-30x more expensive than traditional general-purpose data center IT infrastructure.
Chinese hyperscalers’ capex is decreasing due to their inability to access NVIDIA’s GPU chips, and decreasing cloud revenues.
New Delhi, Beijing, Seoul, Hong Kong, London, Buenos Aires, San Diego –July 25, 2023
Globalcloudservice providers will grow capex by an estimated 7.8% YoY in 2023, according to the latest research from Counterpoint’sCloud Service. Higher debt costs, enterprise spending cuts and muted cloud revenue growth are impacting infrastructure spend in data centers compared to 2022.
Commenting on the large cloud service providers’ 2023 plans,Senior Research Analyst Akshara Bassisaid, “Hyperscalers are increasingly focusing on ramping up theirAIinfrastructure in data centers to cater to the demand for training proprietary AI models, launching native B2C generative AI user applications, and expanding AIaaS (Artificial Intelligence-as-a-Service) product offerings”.
According to Counterpoint’s estimates, around 35% of the total cloud capex for 2023 is earmarked for IT infrastructure including servers and networking equipment compared to 32% in 2022.
Source: Counterpoint Research
Source: Counterpoint Research
In 2023,MicrosoftandAmazon(AWS) will account for 45% of the total capex. US-based hyperscalers will contribute to 91.9% of the overall global capex in 2023.
Chinese hyperscalers are spending less due to slower growth in cloud revenues amid a weak economy and difficulties in acquiring the latestNVIDIAGPU chips for AI due to US bans. The scaled-down version – A800 of the flagship A100/H100 chips – that NVIDIA has been supplying to Chinese players may also come under the purview of the ban, further reducing access to AI silicon for Chinese hyperscalers.
Source: Counterpoint Research
Based on Counterpoint estimates, Microsoft will spend proportionally the most on AI-related infrastructure with 13.3% of its capex directed towards AI, followed byGoogleat around 6.8% of its capex. Microsoft has already announced its intention to integrate AI within its existing suite of products.
AI infrastructure can be 10x-30x more expensive than traditional general-purpose data center IT infrastructure.
Though Chinese players are investing a larger portion of their spends towards AI, the amount is significantly less than that of the US counterparts due to a lower overall capex.
The comprehensive and in-depth ‘Global Cloud Service Providers Capex’ report is available. Please contact Counterpoint Research to access the report.
Background
Counterpoint Technology Market Research is a global research firm specializing in products in the technology, media and telecom (TMT) industry. It services major technology and financial firms with a mix of monthly reports, customized projects, and detailed analyses of the mobile and technology markets. Its key analysts are seasoned experts in the high-tech industry.
Over the past few weeks, tech giantsMetaandGoogleannounced that they will no longer be publishing Canadian news on their platforms within Canada following the passage of Bill C-18, or the Online News Act, due to concerns over financial liability imposed on them by the Act. The new law requires large news aggregators operating in the country to pay for the news links they post on their platforms. Meta has already informed news outlets, including The Globe and Mail and The Canadian Press, that their contracts will end at the end of July and that Meta will no longer post the news outlets’ content.
What is Bill C-18 and what is the goal it intends to reach?
Section 4 of theOnline News Actstates the purpose of the bill is:
“…to regulate digital news intermediaries with a view to enhancing fairness in the Canadian digital news marketplace and contributing to its sustainability, including the sustainability of news businesses in Canada, in both the non-profit and for-profits sectors, including independent local ones.”
通俗地说,就是政府想increase the visibility of smaller local news outlets to expand the portfolio of news sources and to avoid the dominance of the few large news publishers who have contracts with large media aggregators like Meta and Alphabet (Facebook and Google). The way this legislation intends to reach its goal is by imposing a ‘link tax’ on these large media aggregators, which means they will have to pay for the news links that they post on their platforms. These media platforms will be expected to keep a roster of the ‘eligible journalists’ that are posted on the platform to ensure there is transparency on the news outlets and to ensure there is enough representation from underrepresented groups. These regulations aim to hold the media platforms accountable to ensure they are giving more news sources an equal opportunity to be promoted on these large platforms.
Tech giants’ concerns with Bill C-18
Despite the goal of equal news source opportunity, these tech giants are choosing to blockCanadianheadlines rather than comply. Google announced concerns that led it to pull from the Canadian media market:
Subsidizing and promoting ‘Bad Actors’ and strict media control from the government
Google explained in their statement that the definition provided for ‘eligible news businesses’ is very broad with low standards for journalistic integrity, which could risk the spread of propaganda and fake news. This gives rise to the issue of Google having to pay these outlets and provide them with profit and a platform to peddle poor information. This is currently prevented through qualifying criteria for journalism tax credits to be considered in Canada.
As Google pays proportionally for these headings, the act also stipulates that there is no ‘undue preference’ in the rank of relevant searches that Google currently uses. This means that there is a chance these bad actors could achieve a higher ranking in the searches and therefore reach Canadians a lot easier than with the current Google algorithm, which aims to return the most reliable and relevant sources.
On the flip side, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) will be responsible for qualifying who is considered an ‘eligible journalist’ and will be able to control the content that Canadians have access to. Although this could help control the foreign ‘eligible journalist’ who may peddle propaganda, it will also give more control to the government regarding what news Canadians will have access to that could eventually create a bubble. There is little information about the checks and balances that are in place by the CRTC to moderate these eligible news sources.
Lose-Lose business deal for Google and Meta
The new bill would require Google to pay news outlets for the links they provide, but ultimately the link is driving visitors to the publisher’s website. This means that instead of free marketing of the news article on Google (which is currently happening), the news outlet would get free marketing plus a pay cheque from Google. Aside from the journalistic morale that Google outlined before, from a business perspective, it makes very little sense for Google to participate as they would be paying the client and also providing them with a free service.
Status and the expected implications
这是过去从这些大型科技c虚张声势ompanies; the media industry has seen the power these giants have, as a similar legislation change happened in Spain which caused Google News to shut down for almost seven years, although ultimately it ended up returning after there were changes to the law. The CRTC announced this week that the ministry is drafting regulations that will address the concerns these media platforms have with the legislation. The ultimate fear of these tech giants is that there is an undefined financial liability that they will be responsible for, so the goal of these drafted regulations is to answer exactly how much these tech giants will be expected to pay if they do decide to keep their services in Canada.
Despite the turmoil this has caused in the Canadian Media market, other governments are also aiming to find ways to limit the media control these privatized media platforms have over the spread of news within a country. US states are exploring similar ways to enforce more competition in the news. Meta and Alphabet’s revenues would take a harder hit if the two companies follow the same course of action in the US as well.
Weekly Newsletter July 13, 2023 Why Are Foldables So Hot In China?
‘The Morning Brief’ is a thrice weekly podcast hosted byDia Rekhifrom the Economic Times. The show focuses on sharing stories from the world of business, economy, politics and markets. Dia Rekhi engages in a discussion with our Vice President of Research-Neil Shahcentered around the topic of “Threads.”
Neil talked about Meta’s edge over Twitter and Meta’s strategy, Twitter’s scale in India and its positioning, implications of Musk’s involvement on Twitter’s monetization efforts, Threads immediate aim and challenges.
Meta’s history with AI is bad. Between 2016 and 2020, most of its hiring involved humans to keep objectionable content to a minimum because its automated processes were not nearly good enough to keep Facebook out of trouble. This had a direct impact on the company’s profitability and in part is why the company has been able to cut so much cost recently without any material impact on its operations.
We have heard and read a lot about the weakness of Meta Platforms when it comes to AI, but it has improved a lot over the last two years and now is in a position to offer a challenge to the leaders.
During 2020, signs started to emerge that at least in research, Meta Platforms was beginning to make a proper contribution towards the body of knowledge in AI.
This has continued, and although very little has shown up in its products to date, it has also demonstrated good progress in the development oflarge language models (LLMs)which underpin the latest chat services that everyone is so excited about.
Meta has an LLM called LlaMa, which exists in a range of sizes between 7bn parameters and 65bn parameters and these will underpin chatbots in Messenger, and WhatsApp.
Versions of LlaMa will also be retrained to improve photo and video editing in Instagram and Reels as well as to use for internal corporate processes.
However, where Meta has made its real impact is in the open-source community where its LlaMa foundation models have become the standard upon which thousands of hobbyists and enthusiasts have been tinkering with generative AI.
The open-source community has also been quick to adopt new AI techniques that the big companies have not, which has given it the ability to do on laptops what OpenAI and Google still need data centres to achieve.
This has caused some consternation among the big companies to the point that OpenAI is considering releasing the full version of GPT-3 with its weights to compete with LlaMa.
It is not clear how LlaMa reached the open-source community as foundation models are very difficult to switch in and out and all of the work currently going on is based on LlaMa.
LlaMa becoming the platform for open-source development means that Meta now has access to a very large supply of innovations on top of its model that it can use or build on to create other services.
This combined with the increase in the quality of academic research coming out of Meta Platforms is what has led us to upgrade Meta Platforms from a laggard to the middle of the pack.
In terms of pushing back the boundaries of AI, the two leaders remain Open AI and Google, but Meta Platforms is now right behind them alongside Baidu, ByteDance and SenseTime.
Part of the problem with assessing China is that the information flow around the development of cutting-edge technology in China has all but dried up due to the government’s moves to tighten national security.
Consequently, it is hard to say with a degree of certainty where the Chinese AI developments lie, but given how quickly open source has managed to catch up, it is difficult to think that the Chinese are not also hot on the heels of the leaders.
Therefore, Meta Platforms has greatly improved its position in AI. Its models are rapidly becoming a platform for development in the open-source community.
(This is a version of a blog that first appeared on Radio Free Mobile. All views expressed are Richard’s own.)
Apple announced Vision Pro at the June 5 WWDC with a launch price of $3,499.
It will be released early next year starting with the US, the biggest XR headset market with over 70% share in 2022.
Featuring advanced specs and a sleek design, it has enterprise, gaming, content and connectivity use cases.
However, with a price of12 times that of an entry-level Quest headset, it is unlikely to ship over half a million units in its first year.
Apple made its long-anticipated foray into the extended reality (XR) market with the announcement of a $3,499 headset, Vision Pro, at this year’s WWDC on June 5. While Apple is calling it an augmented reality (AR) headset, it is effectively a mixed reality headset based on video pass-through, although done better than anyone else. This is an important step forward for the technology which may eventually replace smartphones, personal computers and televisions.
Apple’s short-term and long-term prospects
有如此高的期望,苹果的股票an all-time high before the announcement but fell during the keynote address. This shift in investor stance reflects the challenges that complicate this opportunity.
Apple has also not jumped on to the AI bandwagon so far as it is not its core strength but may yield dividends in the nearer term, thus influencing investor perception of the stock’s attractiveness.
Given primarily the hefty price tag, which is 12 times that of an entry-level Quest headset, the first iteration of the headset is unlikely to sell more than half a million units in the first year of availability. Investors’ reaction also reflects this. Apple’s concern, however, is not the day’s stock movement but the next decade and beyond of technological evolution – about a post-smartphone future and how to secure it.
WATCH:Apple Vision Pro Mixed Reality Headset: Quick Look at Key Features
Cutting-edge technology and Apple premium explain the price tag
In order to secure this long-term future, after eight years of work and 5,000 patents, Apple has announced what it describes as “the most advanced personal electronics device ever”. It features Apple’s powerful M2 processor with its custom R1 co-processor that helps manage the computational load from multiple cameras and other sensors in the spatial computing device.
它的两个microOLED显示提供了一个无可匹敌的竞争wing experience with more than a 4K-per-eye resolution. So far, only tethered VR devices by Czech-based VRGineers and China-based Pimax have offered headsets with 4K display but in LCD.
The Vision Pro also takes the industry forward with an immersive audio experience enabled by two amplified drivers in audio pods next to each ear.
In demos, Apple employees scanned reviewers’ ears and their surroundings to calibrate spatial audio, besides scanning their faces for Face ID.
The device uses advanced scanning to personalize the experience. Facial scanning is done to create a representation of the user’s face. This is used in, for example, virtual conferencing. Eye movements and facial expressions are rendered faithfully. The device also scans the environment to optimize the audio settings to deliver accurate spatial audio.
With an external battery pack, Vision Pro is just shy of being completely self-sufficient
The headset does not come with controllers as it uses advanced eye, voice and gesture tracking through 12 cameras, 6 microphones and 5 sensors.
An external battery pack, however, prevents the device from being completely standalone despite featuring multiple integrated chipsets which enable autonomous computing. A two-hour battery life, then, is disappointing.
Developer kits and six months to create apps for wide-ranging use cases
The gestation period of six months before the headset is available for purchase in early 2024 in the US will enable developers to build, iterate and test apps on the headset. They carry a heavy weight of expectations to update existing apps for the spatial environment and to create killer new apps offering use cases for both consumers as well as enterprises on Apple’s all-new VisionOS platform.
Scale and size to allow Apple to forge partnerships critical for the technology’s success
The partnerships, such as those Apple has struck with Disney, Unity and Zeiss, are also key to ensuring the success of Vision Pro, and indeed the technology in general, especially in the early days when buyers may need every push to try out a technology with which few are familiar.
元为企业级尝试这个头et, the 2022-launched Quest Pro, with indeterminate although likely unremarkable outcomes. Apple’s advantage lies in its ability to entice a whole host of firms, including Hollywood studios, to create custom content for its headset.
Concerns and challenges that may obstruct Apple’s path to spatial success
视觉Pro显然是只在我早期的一步s going to be a long journey before face-worn computers become mainstream. There are several obstacles that obstruct this path and will need to be overcome to realize such a future.
Form factor
While Apple’s ski goggle-like design is sleek and attractive, widespread acceptance can be attained by compressing similar compute in a compact eye-worn glass-like design.
Weight
The headset offloads some of its weight to an external battery pack but is still described by reviewers as being hefty. For a headset to become mainstream, it will need to be lightweight enough to be comfortably worn for extended periods.
Battery
Eventually, the battery needs to be integrated with the main headset while concurrently reducing its weight. Besides, the battery life will also need to be increased to at least 8-10 hours before headsets can come close to becoming integral parts of our daily lives.
Privacy
In this regard, Apple has already taken steps to allay concerns by ensuring that consumer data is protected, and in some cases, not even accessible to Apple. With its current headset looking clearly like a tech device and unlikely to be used for extended periods in public, Apple has also dodged one of the bullets that killed Google Glasses – the fear of headset users breaching the privacy of unsuspecting passersby. However, as Apple’s headset becomes sleeker, these concerns will have to be addressed.
Apple’s success will be the industry’s gain
Regardless of these challenges, Apple’s long-awaited entry into the segment has already generated an upswing in consumer interest towards XR hardware that perhaps even Facebook’s name change to Meta did not. This interest is likely to translate into increased sales of headsets of all types. For those unable to afford Apple’s prices, or unwilling to wait long enough for it to become available for sale (especially outside of the US), rival headsets will be good alternatives to try out the tech.
So, even if the launch of what Apple described as “the most advanced personal electronics device ever” may not be an iPhone moment, it is a positive step and will take the industry forward.
Feel free to reach us at press@www.arena-ruc.com for questions regarding our latest research and insights.
Meta announced the launch of the Quest 3 headset on June 1. To be retailed at just under $500, it will be released in autumn.The Quest 3 will have both VR and MR capabilities.
The Quest 2 has also received a $100 price cut, with the entry-level variant available at $299 starting June 4.
Together with its newly discounted predecessor, the Quest 3 is expected to help the company maintain market dominance for now.
Meta’s announcement came days ahead of WWDC, where Apple will reportedly announce its own MR headset.
London, San Diego, New Delhi, Beijing, Buenos Aires, Seoul, Hong Kong – June 5, 2023
The announcement of Meta’s Quest 3 headset at $499.99 and the Quest 2’s $100 price cut to $299 just before the rumoured launch of Apple’s first mixed reality (MR) headset shows the social media parent’s determination to lead the extended reality (XR) headset market.
Meta described the Quest 3, which will have both VR and MR capabilities, as its “most powerful headset yet”. The announcement of a successor tothe best-selling XR model in historyafter three years of no consumer-grade headset launches by Meta is an important step forward for the company as well as for the industry.
In line with the season’s flavour, mixed reality, the Quest 3 features the next generation of Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chipset and yet to be disclosed but likely superior display resolution, memory, battery life and weight.
The Quest 3’s launch in autumn, together with the price cut of the Quest 2, will be enough to maintain Meta’s market dominance in terms of shipments for the foreseeable future.
Apple’s expected announcement of a $3,000 MR headset during this year’s Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 5 will create the biggest challenge to Meta since its entry into the segment through the acquisition of Oculus VR in 2014. If Apple succeeds in bringing the cost down and gaining a foothold in the market through successive iterations of the $3,000 headset, it may supplant Meta as the biggest revenue generator in the market which Meta has dominated thus far both in terms of revenue and shipments.
Background
Counterpoint Technology Market Research is a global research firm specializing in products in the TMT (technology, media and telecom) industry. It services major technology and financial firms with a mix of monthly reports, customized projects and detailed analyses of the mobile and technology markets. Its key analysts are seasoned experts in the high-tech industry.
Feel free to reach us at press@www.arena-ruc.com for questions regarding our latest research and insights.
Meta announced its Meta Quest Pro mixed reality headset at a price of $1,500
This was around double the price of market expectations pre-announcement
Because of this, it could be a hard sell to Quest 2 upgraders and new consumers alike
To justify pricing, the Pro packs more features, better components and is sleeker
The display is upgraded, but we’re expecting better ones from Apple and Sony next year
Recent partnerships with Microsoft, Zoom and Accenture signal enterprise expansion, where pricing may be less of a concern
London, New Delhi, Hong Kong, Seoul, Beijing, San Diego, Buenos Aires – October 12, 2022
As expected, Meta launched Meta Quest Pro at Meta Connect 2022. It will be available from October 25, however the Quest Pro’s $1499 price tag is significantly higher than the $700-$800 price band which was expected before the launch event.
Given one of the major catalysts of Quest 2’s success was its low price which complemented respectable if not impressive features, and content, the $1,500 price of Quest Pro will be a hard sell to Meta’s many previous customers, many of whom may continue to prefer Quest 2.
With these users having spent $1.5 billion on games and apps alone on the Quest Store, Meta certainly hopes to attract some of them to the Quest Pro too. This can be seen, for instance, through Meta working with Microsoft to bring xCloud gaming to the Quest Pro.
Commenting on the features Meta offers with increased ASP,Senior Analyst Harmeet Singh Walia说,“证明陡峭的价格,专业的追求packs more features as well as a sleeker design than Quest 2 (its optic stack is 40% slimmer). It has 10 advanced VR/MR sensors, spatial audio, pancake lenses, 256GB storage, 12GB RAM, and a new Snapdragon XR2+ processor. The Meta Quest Touch Pro controllers that accompany it have three cameras and Snapdragon 662 mobile processors. It also has a better display than the Quest 2’s, although, LCD displays (even if with 37% more PPI and 75% more contrast than Quest 2) may not signal value for money to users who will likely find superior displays in Apple’s upcoming MR device or Sony’s much cheaper PlayStation VR2.
This may not matter too much because given its recent partnerships with Microsoft, Zoom and Accenture, Meta has taken a definite direction towards gaining more traction with enterprise users. It hopes to combine its hardware and software with Microsoft’s technology (bringing Teams to Quest Horizon workrooms for Teams) to help bring VR to business and industry with Accenture, which has deep connections with Fortune 500 companies. Also having already bought 60,000 Quest 2 devices for its workforce which stands at a total of 700,000, the potential of its own and direct contribution to Quest sales is significant.”
Vice President of Research Peter Richardsonadded, “With Quest Pro, Meta has also taken a step into MR and closer to AR which it hopes to develop further after having introduced so-called smart glasses in partnership with Ray-Ban last year.
Quest Pro is significant then, because it signals Meta understands that the real value add in the XR market is likely found in the enterprise for now, rather than consumer users.”
Feel free to reach us at press@www.arena-ruc.com for questions regarding our latest research and insights.
Background
Counterpoint Technology Market Research is a global research firm specializing in products in the TMT (technology, media and telecom) industry. It services major technology and financial firms with a mix of monthly reports, customized projects and detailed analyses of the mobile and technology markets. Its key analysts are seasoned experts in the high-tech industry.
In order to access Counterpoint Technology Market Research Limited (Company or We hereafter) Web sites, you may be asked to complete a registration form. You are required to provide contact information which is used to enhance the user experience and determine whether you are a paid subscriber or not. Personal Information When you register on we ask you for personal information. We use this information to provide you with the best advice and highest-quality service as well as with offers that we think are relevant to you. We may also contact you regarding a Web site problem or other customer service-related issues. We do not sell, share or rent personal information about you collected on Company Web sites.
How to unsubscribe and Termination
You may request to terminate your account or unsubscribe to any email subscriptions or mailing lists at any time. In accessing and using this Website, User agrees to comply with all applicable laws and agrees not to take any action that would compromise the security or viability of this Website. The Company may terminate User’s access to this Website at any time for any reason. The terms hereunder regarding Accuracy of Information and Third Party Rights shall survive termination.
Website Content and Copyright
This Website is the property of Counterpoint and is protected by international copyright law and conventions. We grant users the right to access and use the Website, so long as such use is for internal information purposes, and User does not alter, copy, disseminate, redistribute or republish any content or feature of this Website. User acknowledges that access to and use of this Website is subject to these TERMS OF USE and any expanded access or use must be approved in writing by the Company. – Passwords are for user’s individual use – Passwords may not be shared with others – Users may not store documents in shared folders. – Users may not redistribute documents to non-users unless otherwise stated in their contract terms.
Changes or Updates to the Website
The Company reserves the right to change, update or discontinue any aspect of this Website at any time without notice. Your continued use of the Website after any such change constitutes your agreement to these TERMS OF USE, as modified. 准确的信息:尽管欺诈的信息tained on this Website has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, We disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of such information. User assumes sole responsibility for the use it makes of this Website to achieve his/her intended results.
Third Party Links: This Website may contain links to other third party websites, which are provided as additional resources for the convenience of Users. We do not endorse, sponsor or accept any responsibility for these third party websites, User agrees to direct any concerns relating to these third party websites to the relevant website administrator.
Cookies and Tracking
We may monitor how you use our Web sites. It is used solely for purposes of enabling us to provide you with a personalized Web site experience. This data may also be used in the aggregate, to identify appropriate product offerings and subscription plans. Cookies may be set in order to identify you and determine your access privileges. Cookies are simply identifiers. You have the ability to delete cookie files from your hard disk drive.
