"Attention is all you need"? Joking aside, there's no reason AdWords can't become AdWordVectors and be even more effectively targeted.
This is what scares me about these chat interfaces. In today's world, an ad is clearly an ad.. Or is it? Even now we have advertorials and "sponsored posts" that blend into content maybe a little too much sometimes. What happens when chatbot companies start taking money to subtly nudge their models into shilling for this or that product.
Or manipulating social / political views. Scary stuff.
to clarify -- Microsoft invested $1bn in 2019, half of which was Azure credits. The other half is cash. Since then, they invested a further $2bn.
And META reportedly has spent billions on the meta-verse. It's kind of interesting that language models are now making meta-tech look outdated. Then again maybe language models will create the metaverse
Did metaverse ever not look like a VR rehash of second life? I’m genuinely curious, I‘ve had VR headsets since Oculus DK1 I’ve never seen anything very compelling on the VR persistent alternate reality front.
Not having read the terms in any detail, I will say this: it can be very easy to not report profits for a very long time.
The point was not that the profits are long tailed but rather if openai thought there were massive future profits and the potential to become a google killer then they wouldn’t give away half of their company today for $10B.
But how do you know that they didn't predict that it is only by having a $10 billion that they _can_ become the next google killer, because of the initial cost outlay, and the inevitable fight back from google (which would then require a warchest, of which i'm sure this 10 billion is a part of)?
GLM-130B[1] is something comparable to GPT-3. It's a 130billion parameter model vs GPT-3's 175 billion, and it can comfortably run on current-gen high end consumer level hardware. A system with 4 RTX 3090s ( The proverbial 'some guy on Twitter'[2] got it setup, and broke down the costs, demonstrated some prompts, and what not. The output's pretty terrible, but it's unclear to me whether that's inherent or a result of…
Agree, but much less than 10 years. Now that the transformer is establishing itself as the model, we’ll see dedicated HW acceleration for transformers, encoders, decoders, etc. I will eat my hat* if we don’t see local inference for 200B+ parameters within 5 years. * I don’t own a hat
i would imagine these models would be considered trade secrets, and that the models (esp. good ones that take a lot of resources to have trained) would not leave the data center. Your access to such models would be dictated by an api instead of locally run.
The internet does not accurately reflect our biases. It is much cheaper online to post bad content, or hateful content, then "good" content. In real life, almost the opposite is true.
Doesn't that mean that the internet more accurately represents our biases because most of the time they're hidden by fear of social retribution?
No, it means on the internet one bad actor can make thousands of alt-accounts to send out a disproportionate amount of content pushing the same message.
It's hard to get people to understand the disproportionate effort fixated people put into anything: it's a problem in real life, but they get reacted to. If their fixation becomes some weird message on the internet, nothing happens to them but people have trouble believing the scope of time and effort they'll put into evading bans, blocks, and chasing down people across forums.
> Soon, you’ll see AI-powered features in Search Despite this blog obviously being written for Wall St, this line is key. This is why anyone is going to struggle to compete with Google in AI. Google Search is used so widely and its taxonomy of meaning so vast already that once they flip this on they’ll be unstoppable. (Assuming any rate of improvement whatsoever as we search.) I’m not mentioning all other learning da…
I wonder how long till they open it up to your private data stored in Google? Eg. User: What should I be doing today? AI: You have a court appearance at 9am. Prioritize that, because failing to appear might result in an arrest warrant. Next, prioritize your mums birthday - all the other family will be there, and with your mums cancer results last week, this might be the last. If you travel between them by bus, then y…
Isn't this what the Google assistant basically does?
>AI can be helpful in these moments, synthesizing insights for questions where there’s no one right answer. Soon, you’ll see AI-powered features in Search that distill complex information and multiple perspectives into easy-to-digest formats, so you can quickly understand the big picture and learn more from the web: whether that’s seeking out additional perspectives, like blogs from people who play both piano and gui…
That's good for users, potentially. But not good for the sites where google is sourcing the information.
I've already banned the crawler from mine for the AMP and other crap they've been pulling. If you want to get more complete results, you'll need to use another search engine, which felt like the only thing in my power that I could actually do about their shenanigans. Now I'm glad I took this decision a few years ago: they've already got a search monopoly, but not being able to copy my content to further increase it? Yes please. I just hope the competition, with less deep pockets, is able to follow suit.
Exactly. If Google is able to provide better answers than the garbage websites with their SEO hacks, those garbage websites will not get clicks. I could see this improving the incentive system significantly
- collect creators content, make it searchable, become worlds largest company - encourage more content because PROFIT - content becomes garbage - have to pay those pesky content creators - slowly squeeze out entire industries by inlining more and more content - still, not squeezing the juice all the way - introduce "AI", it just laundries copyrighted content to look original - bye creators - for some odd reason peopl…
I agree this is bland corporate speak. But it reminded me of a question that's been floating around: A number of pundits, here on HN and elsewhere, keep referring to these large language models are "google killers." This just doesn't make sense to me. It feels like Google can easily pivot its ad engine to work with the AI-driven chat systems. It can augment answers with links to additional sources of information, be…
> But I guess I'm wondering: what am I missing? Why would a chatbot like ChatGPT disrupt Google vs forcing Google to simply evolve. And perhaps make even more money?
People thought google has no time to develop something like ChatGPT when they were totally wrong.
Yet you better cooperate otherwise you won't get any visitors at all.
Nobody owes you visitors.
Nobody owes you a normal life but it would be a shame if society actually thought that way and we never developed social security and universal healthcare.
Using the monopoly on search to dictate how you shall present your content to the google god is still a bad thing.