I love the fact that they pretend to know how to spend 1B in 18 months. Good luck. To the investors.
Training a large language model is very expensive.
Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
181–190 of 504 posts
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not clear if (i) a lot of the surplus will be captured by the AI providers and (ii) that the impact will be anywhere as big as people now guess/want it to be. Making a bet on the future is fine, of course.
My question would also be what kind of insight McKinsey can provide here. What, if anything, do they know about AI that we don't know?
If anything McKinsey has a lot to gain from exaggerating the numbers so more companies come to them for AI solutions or whatever their next consulting product is.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not clear if (i) a lot of the surplus will be captured by the AI providers and (ii) that the impact will be anywhere as big as people now guess/want it to be. Making a bet on the future is fine, of course.
My question would also be what kind of insight McKinsey can provide here. What, if anything, do they know about AI that we don't know?
Likely not much and assuredly wrong, I just wanted to ground my argument with numbers that came from people who presumably did more research than I was willing to do for an HN post.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, this is just the beginning. Just wait till we get actual scifi robots in the next year or so. FWIW, I do find that Claude (Anthropic's GPT) is often better than GPT4 -- and very fast. Entrants can compete on price, safety, quality, etc.
Is it possible to test it somewhere?
https://poe.com/Claude-instant
It also provides a ChatGPT interface, and a number of other models.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole US society seems more puritan while more capitalist at the same time, seen from this side of the pond. It’s a paradox I can’t really explain, any clues?
You're conflating capitalism and greed. Plenty of greedy people in non-capitalist systems.
> Plenty of greedy people in non-capitalist systems.
Totally agreed. But I am not placing any moral value on either greed or capitalism. I would think, however, that capitalists would not ignore such an obvious profit center as the sex industry. Thus my bafflement.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#186This is a lot of money going into compute. I will say this again. EU is sleeping on the opportunity to throw money in an opensource initiative, in a field were money matter and the field is still (kind of) level.
> [2008] France has been given the green light by the European Commission for a $152 million government grant for a consortium building a European rival to U.S. internet search giant Google. I don't think government funding to compete with private businesses works well https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/ec-...
No consortiums, just subsidize cloud or infra costs only.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is amazing that in the year 2023, where things are possible that were science fiction until recently, we still rely on private payment processors, credit card companies, which extract fees for a service that doesn't have any technical necessity anymore. I think the reason is just inertia. They work well enough in most cases, and the fees aren't so high as to be painful, so there is little pressure to switch to som…
> switch to something more modern such as?
I would be very surprised if something based on Blockchain or similar software doesn't offer a solution here. Another route would be to establish a protocol for near instantaneous bank transfers, and try to get a lot of banks on board. The immediacy of transfers seems to be the main reason why companies use credit card services, not buyer protection or actual credit.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not an argument for crypto, it's an argument for better regulations so that processors don't make up their own rules.
> This is not an argument for crypto, it's an argument for better regulations so that processors don't make up their own rules. Better (which I assume is your euphemism for "more") regulation isn't neceesarily the answer, or even particularly the answer. Do you want to force payment processors to do work they don't want to do? Isn't there a word for that?
Not necessarily more. Better in this context means clearer and enforced.
PayPal is the prime example where it's operating very similar to a bank. You have an account with a balance and can send and receive money, but it doesn't see itself as a bank and in many countries doesn't have a bank license. At least in part this is done to avoid the regulatory work that comes with it.
I absolutely want to force payment processors to do work they don't want to do. For example, banks in Germany are forced to provide you with a basic bank account regardless whether they want to or not. That's because a bank account is simply a must have to take part in modern life. If PayPal decides it doesn't want to do business with you, for whatever arbitrary reason, you are effectively locked out of a lot of online stores that only accept PayPal as a payment method. There is plenty of examples of PayPals really sketchy behaviour online. Every few months you can even see complaints on HN about it.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is hilarious to me, in that the disgruntled departure just did a 180… how long until the next disgruntled spin-out for higher reasons chases the dollar too… The cynic in me wants to ask "What makes you think his departure was because of an anti-commercialisation position?" My take (probably just as wrong as everybody's else take) is that he saw the huge commercialisation potential and realised that he could ma…
If you look read the parent comment in this thread you'd get an answer...
> If you look read the parent comment in this thread you'd get an answer...
I looked and I didn't get an answer. hence my comment.
To clarify, we know what he said his reason was, we don't know if that really was his reason.
When people leave they very rarely voice the actual reason for leaving; the reason they give is designed to make them look as good as possible for any future employer or venture.
Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s needs to be some difficult barriers to entry beyond having the money to spend on training FLOPS in order for a startup to compete. I have no idea if there are or there aren’t, but that’s the big question.
I mean, this is just the beginning. Just wait till we get actual scifi robots in the next year or so. FWIW, I do find that Claude (Anthropic's GPT) is often better than GPT4 -- and very fast. Entrants can compete on price, safety, quality, etc.
I find that Claude is more conversational (better fine tuning), but not as smart as even ChatGPT.
Prompt:
The original titles and release years in the Harry Potter series are:
Philosopher's Stone (1997)
Chamber of Secrets (1998)
Prisoner of Azkaban (1999)
Goblet of Fire (2000)
Order of the Phoenix (2003)
Half-Blood Prince (2005)
Deathly Hallows (2007)
Given this, generate a new Harry Potter title, using only the words found in the existing titles. Avoid orderings in the original titles. You may add or remove plurals and possessives.
ChatGPT: Blood Chamber of the Phoenix's Prisoner
Claude-instant: Chamber Prince Half-Blood Phoenix