Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 541 posts

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#101

Post by scottLobster »

shaklee3 wrote: post #100
scottLobster wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expected it to give me the most efficient electric vehicle on the market in 2022 in terms of miles/kwh rating. Not that hard. As for recent data, I tried the same question with 2020 and got the following: A: There are a number of electric vehicles that were available in 2020 that are known for their energy efficiency. Here are a few examples: Tesla Model 3: The Tesla Model 3 is a compact sedan that has a range of u…

your first question to it didn't even make sense, since it was asking an impossible question for it. the second answer seems... fine? what is it you're looking for? most efficient isn't a single definition.

I said "energy efficient", and interesting you think so, because Google figured it out easily: https://www.google.com/search?q=What+is+the+most+energy+effi...

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#102

Post by Vespasian »

brookst wrote: post #82
jonas21 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, this could be a huge opportunity for Google. 1. Google already has their own internal equivalent of ChatGPT [1]. They haven't deployed it publicly yet, probably out of fear of bad PR. 2. Unlike search ads, which you can block or ignore, chat ads will be woven into the conversation at opportune times. 3. A chat format means users will spend more time on Google, rather than clicking on a link and lea…

2 is not going to happen. The UX is terrible, and competitors who don’t rely on ad revenue can offer a far superior product that isn’t trying to sell you movie tickets when you ask for a synopsis of the three Godfather movies. 1 is because it will spook investors, not the public.

How do these competitors finance their products?

Historically people are very reluctant to directly pay for them and in any case providers might want to double dip on ads.

Your local used car dealership knows a lot about cars. It's their business to do so. Still, they are highly motivated to not tell you the whole truth and many people know that (some don't)

My prediction is that ChatGPT will be exactly like that or in other words: Smooth talking Google which is untrustworthy beyond "factual" searches like "biggest X", "weight of Y", "president of Z"

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#103

Post by fnordpiglet »

mtnGoat wrote: post #44
fnordpiglet wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the roughly 100 autopilot trips I’ve taken - you nailed it - I died 15 times.

I think this is called survivor bias?

That explains why I pass by so many smoking burned out teslas. My turn soon I guess!

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#104

Post by fnordpiglet »

lossolo wrote: post #24
fnordpiglet wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the roughly 100 autopilot trips I’ve taken - you nailed it - I died 15 times.

It's not about 100 easy autopilot trips, it's about 1001 trip where you as human can easily see what to do but AI will interpret reality wrong because it was not trained to handle that edge case and you will die.

That sounds more like 99.9% not 85%. Guess it’s a good thing I don’t nap while it’s on.

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#105

Post by Vespasian »

alar44 wrote: post #41
testmasterflex wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you use it for exactly?

Not parent, but basic scripts and programming, debugging, error codes, outlines for emails, reports, dry documents, code translation, brainstorming, explaining code snippets, playing fake text adventure games, creating lists, and on and on. Anyone saying GPT isn't useful because it's not Wikipedia or right 100% of the time are completely missing the mark and imo, is not able to think outside the box. It's insanely us…

It's useful (obviously) but not as a 1 to 1 replacement of search on it's own.

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#106

Post by potamic »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #14

pg deserves a lot of credit for predicting this a decade ago: http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html > The way to win here is to build the search engine all the hackers use. A search engine whose users consisted of the top 10,000 hackers and no one else would be in a very powerful position despite its small size, just as Google was when it was that search engine. And for the first time in over a decade the idea of swit…

If anything, ChatGPT will be for the masses. Programming as a skill has been commoditized a fair bit over the last decade and I believe the kind of hackers pg was talking about would actively eschew all forms of AI search.

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#107

Post by yywwbbn »

noncoml wrote: post #18
sslayer wrote: post #7

I predict ChatGPT is the next Self driving Tesla tech.

There is a big difference IMHO. Self Driving must get it right 101% of the time. ChatGPT search getting better than Google even 50% of the time should be enough. All the need is to add references to the answers that ChatGPT gives right now, and it will be game over for Google.

> ChatGPT search getting better than Google even 50% of the time should be enough.

That’s a bit tricky because wrong results in Google are easier to spot due to metadata and context. With ChatGPT you have neither. In worse cases you ended up with a confidently incorrect statistical mode who think’s it’s infallible

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#108

Post by Vespasian »

achow wrote: post #94
Vespasian wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of it is lack of monetization and advertising. We have forgotten what technology is capable of if it's not overrun by business people. For now no one paied ChatGPT to "recommend" you one over the other or engaged in SEO to game the system. Once that happens it will just as trustworthy as a Google search and smart people will develop a sense of mistrusting the system just like they would a smooth talking sleazy c…

That is extreme view. Why not a link at the bottom which takes to the identified car company website, where I get to see 360 degree view along with all other jazz that the company's marketing spent millions on; and they would be thankful to send some hundreds to ChatGPT way. This is exactly how Google AdWords started. To your point yes, it may go Google way, but there is hope (atleast in the initial years) it may not…

I agree it will be a process but the motivation to game the lists, comparisons and evaluation in the "natural" result parts will be enormous.

If I search for "recipe for an apple pie" google (and the internet), has the information/technology to give me the one paragraph exceprt from my grandma's cooking book that would make me happy.

Instead I get bloated spammy pages filled to the brim with ads.

Maybe I'm cynical to not believe that Microsoft just scoffs at all those opportunities to get squeeze out extra money.

In fact I hope I'm wrong.

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#109

Post by yywwbbn »

pupppet wrote: post #46

Google and Microsoft want their web properties to be your final destination, not your gateway to everything else. To achieve this they’ll use tools that completely rely on user-generated content to give you exactly what you need so you don’t need to go anywhere else. Except now where’s the incentive to generate new content nobody will ever see. For all intents and purposes they’re orchestrating the end of the web.

Do they? How does Google earn money then if nobody is willing to pay them for ads that link to their products?

> give you exactly what you need so you don’t need to go anywhere else.

For free? That seems a incredible altruistic…

Re: Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

#110

Post by rishav_sharan »

karpierz wrote: post #50

I'm seeing a lot of responses that see ChatGPT replacing Google, and it's unclear to me how? It can replace queries like "what's the tallest mountain in France", but that's not really a profitable query for Google. Whereas it's unclear to me how it replaces "best vegetarian restaurants in Gastown". It can string together a coherent statement, but then I have to go search to see whether it actually recommended vegetar…

> It can replace queries like "what's the tallest mountain in France", but that's not really a profitable query for Google.

The tragedy of the Search Engines (from their perspective) is that if you give a good result for the user's query - they leave your page and thus you cannot monetize them. And if you show sub par results so that they have to refine queries/scroll through them, users may just stop using your search engine altogether.

So all search engines - Google, Bing etc put a very high value on being able to retain users on the search page itself - where they can show ads on a surface they control fully.

Thats why the search engines try to answer as many queries in-situ itself rather than having the users go out of the page. And this is why this is very important for Bing - this will increases their revenue per visit.

Post reply on HN