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

OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 298 posts

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#231

Post by knodi123 »

lma21 wrote: post #68
logicchains wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they reach AGI, the AGI isn't necessarily going to be happy to work for free.

Do you think AGI will care about wealth at all (whenever this happens)?

depends on how it's grown. If it's a black box that keeps improving but not by any means the developer understands, then maybe so. If we manage to decode the concepts of motivation as pertains to this hypothetical AGI, and are in control of it, then maybe no.

There's nothing that says a mind needs an ego is an essential element, or an id, or any of the other parts of a human mind. That's just how our brains evolved, living in a society over millions of years.

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#232

Post by ben_w »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #179
thethimble wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These “terrible people” seem to have catapulted the world into a generative AI world. They genuinely believe they will build AGI and therefore becoming the world’s most valuable company is a natural consequence. Whether this is possible/probable is a different story, but I think a capped profit structure makes logical sense for the company that is aiming to create AGI. Would you want this technology instead in the ha…

Huggingface and maybe Stability catapulted us into that world. Not OpenAI

Normal people[0] don't mention huggingface, they talk about Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and ChatGPT by name, or the ideas generically.

[0] Well, non-programmers at least: webcomic creators[1][2][3], news anchors[4], opinion piece columnist[5], and stand-up comedians[6]. Programmers also know about GitHub Copilot.

[1] https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/mountweazel

[2] https://www.collectedcurios.com/sequentialart.php?s=1226

[3] https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/10bj8jm/cl...

[4] https://youtu.be/GYeJC31JcM0

[5] https://mobile.twitter.com/CraigGrannell/status/161460352687...

[6] Russell Howard, but I can't find the clip on youtube

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#233

Post by llampx »

tyre wrote: post #115
lonelyasacloud wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google apparently has a market cap of around $1.200 Trillion based [0] largely on (for 2021) revenue of 256.7 billion U.S. dollars, of which 209.49 billion U.S. dollars came from advertising [1]. It's apparently fourth on the list of valuable companies [4] If OpenAI takes a good chunk of Google's ad revenues then it doesn't seem that fanciful that it'll be up toward the top of market caps. [0] https://companiesmarket…

How would OpenAI take a majority of AdWords inventory? Maybe it could write the ads but you’re paying for placement.

Placement on what? Search results that no one is using anymore?

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#234

Post by CBarkleyU »

roflyear wrote: post #147
whimsicalism wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you believe in the product so much, just donate the money. what you are saying is not true.

I can only speak to what I'm familiar with, in my experience this has been the case. In my experience these individuals do donate to charity, but OpenAI is not a charity.

> but OpenAI is not a charity.

Something doesnt have to be a charity to be donated money towards. The question was: Why aren't they donating the money? The answer is: Because the want to make money.

Just FYI: OpenAI tried going the non-profit route, it didnt work, because suprise, suprise, in the grand scheme of VC things nobody wants to donate 10 billion dollars to anything.

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#235

Post by ben_w »

lostmsu wrote: post #221
Firmwarrior wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a lot like Xerox and GUIs, Microsoft and Web 2.0, Microsoft and smartphones, etc

I must say that both of your and parent's points are very enlightening. Yours in that from it follows, that there's still quite a bit of room to get ahead of OpenAI for smaller players. Parent's in that in order to achieve above one can just leverage the public papers produced by bigger research labs.

Depends on the timescale.

I have the feeling that smaller players are about as likely to get past GPT-n family in the next 2-3 years as I am to turn a Farnsworth Fusor into a useful power source.

Major technical challenges that might be solvable by a lone wolf, in the former case to reduce the data/training requirements and in the latter to stop ions wastefully hitting a grid.

But in 10 years the costs should be down about 99%, which turns the AI training costs from "major investment by mega corp or super-rich" into "lottery winner might buy one".

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#237

Post by tomp »

alexeichemenda wrote: post #97
roflyear wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this a wild cap? I'm not an expert but I am aware of private deals that are less than 10x for similar structures.

100x is a great return even for YC standards, but the best returns that business angels, VCs and YC have had is in the order of magnitude of 10000x (yes, ten thousand). So capping at 100x still makes it attractive for investors, yet leaves a lot of potential capital for the non-profit. As one example, Sequoia invested in Airbnb at $0.01 per share, and Airbnb's current stock price is $102, almost exactly 10000x return…

> but the best returns that business angels, VCs and YC have had is in the order of magnitude of 10000x

Aren't those equity returns? i.e. when you sell (your shares of) the company to the public... the reason people still value the company is discounted future returns.

So if you want to generate such returns with cash (i.e. profit) it can take quite a bit longer.

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#238

Post by bossyTeacher »

naillo wrote: post #191
londons_explore wrote: post #140

Let me translate this blog post out of corpspeak...: OpenAI has agreed to use Azure exclusively and for free, in return for Azure massively scaling up it's GPU capacity (which OpenAI was hitting before, hence threatening to move). In return, OpenAI gives an extensive license to Microsoft to use ChatGPT in Bing (and other products). Now why couldn't the blog post have just said that rather than hiding all the details?

Also as part of this exchange Microsoft will own 49% of the company.

source?

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#239

Post by ben_w »

freejazz wrote: post #205
lma21 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think AGI will care about wealth at all (whenever this happens)?

why wouldn't it?

Wealth isn't the same thing to all people, wealth as humans define it isn't necessarily going to be what a superintelligence values.

The speed difference between transistors and synapses is the difference between marathon runners and continental drift; why would an ASI care more about dollars or statues or shares or apartments any more than we care about changes to individual peaks in the mid-Atlantic ridge or how much sand covers those in the Sahara?

Re: OpenAI and Microsoft extend partnership

#240

Post by themacguffinman »

MerManMaid wrote: post #227
davidy123 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That really depends on how much the public accepts results without sources, aka no credit, aka rampant breaking of social norms and copyright, as well as destroying the easy ability to verify something. In many ways, OpenAI and anyone who supports it are trying to pull an Uber here, but shift the Overton on something indescribably larger than transportation licenses. They want to Borg global intelligence (though, of…

>In many ways, OpenAI and anyone who supports it are trying to pull an Uber Can you elaborate here? (Honestly asking since I'm not seeing the similarity)

My understanding of that phrase is that "pull an Uber" means "break laws and social norms to more quickly deliver a product that beats the status quo". Uber broke laws in some regions that required special taxi licenses, and it broke social norms by blurring the lines between contractor and full-time employees when it took away certain employee freedoms common for contractors while not giving them full-time employment benefits.
Post reply on HN