961–970 of 1000 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
OK. So then microsoft still takes their $10B back and owns half of the company.
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…
It does if you remember that Google is in the search ads business, not in the search business.
I guess you could find a way to weasel in ad copy into ChatGPT's answers, but that will kinda massively kill the vibe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well they have those "last mile" boxes which they give out to ISPs to install close to the end users to improve performance (and reduce overall bandwidth needs), is this what you mean? Would love to read more about this if you have some links.
It’s called Open Connect if you want to search for it: https://openconnect.netflix.com/ Some people who’ve worked on it post around here and they’ve funded things like FreeBSD development which is interesting for seeing the kind of problems you have at that kind of traffic volume.
This is a milestone. Google has been keeping the fruits of its AI research locked away from the unwashed masses. They did not seem to be on any path to commercialization, Google Cloud access, or releasing features based on these models. OpenAI (and Microsoft most likely) forced their hand and all at once they are releasing tech-previews and talking about adding it to the search engine results page, all while opening…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
chatgpt launched about 2 months back and have over 100 million users, they have secured funding from microsoft so they are going to optimise and scale its infrastructure. go for their paid offering if latency is bothering you
Parent is clearly making API calls to GPT3, which isn't really comparable to using ChatGPT (paid or unpaid) via a browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh I quite like this. I asked it, conversationally as I would to a human, "when is the super bowl", "what channel is it on", and "who is playing" in that order, and it answered all three perfectly. For fun, I asked it a more complex question - "will ford stock go up or down", and it answered with - Analysts have a median target of $13.00 for Ford stock in the next 12 months[1], with a high estimate of $21.00 and a lo…
> how many legs do three horses and a duck have? > Perplexity: The three horses and duck have a total of 24 legs[1] [2]. However, the question only asks for the number of legs on the floor, which is 4[3][4]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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)?
OpenAI talks mostly about trying to help change humanity, not about winning at business. Their mission is still "advance AI safely for humanity". It's not even obvious they care about winning at business. We seem to be putting that on them.
In that sense, i'm not actually sure they care whether they beat Google or not. I mean that honestly. If they care about the stated goal, it would not matter whether they do it or Google does it. I'm not suggesting they don't want to win at all, but it doesn't seem like that is what is driving them except to the degree they need money to get somewhere?
If they really succeed at most of their mission, killing Google might be a side-effect, it might not, but it would just be collateral damage either way.
Beyond that, I don't disagree, i actually agree with you. My point on that front is basically: "Everyone thinks this will be cheap and easy very soon, and change the world very quickly".
I believe (and suspect OpenAI believes) it will be very expensive upfront, very hard to get resources in the short term, and change the world slower as a result
Question for AI experts out there: ChatGPT is awesome, but it is obviously hamstrung by the fact that it crawled the web at the end of 2021, so all of its data is essentially "frozen" and it doesn't "know" of any topics that occurred after 2021. Seems to me like the next "holy grail" in large language models is building a model that can be continually updated. If Google can achieve that, I think they could leapfrog O…
It's also hamstrung by the fact is just makes things up? I actually think Microsoft is betting on the wrong dog. But let's see :)
In your opinion, which dog should they be betting on?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at my profile, I own content-heavy sites and have for many years. I can show you logs - Wikipedia does virtually nothing. And the content of my sites has been regurgitated by Wikipedia thousands of times.
Are you concerned about all your data being scraped and getting directed for references by chat bots? How would that affect your monetization?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at my profile, I own content-heavy sites and have for many years. I can show you logs - Wikipedia does virtually nothing. And the content of my sites has been regurgitated by Wikipedia thousands of times.
All I can say is that my experience has been very different. Wikipedia editors have been very good at citing our primary sources.