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

Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 504 posts

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#401

Post by worik »

nickpp wrote: post #185
robertlagrant wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> But I am not placing any moral value on either greed or capitalism

That is a missed opportunity

* Capitalism: A system where who owns resources matters more tan who needs them is a morally bankrupt system. A system where starvation and homelessness is an acceptable outcome

* Greed. Greed is bad for everybody. Concentrates scarce resources where they are not needed, that too is moral bankruptcy

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#402

Post by worik »

mschild wrote: post #274
robertlagrant wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's operating very similar to a bank We might be talking at cross purposes; I'm not sure! How is it like a bank?

PayPal offers you a virtual account that you can pay money into. You can use that money to make purchases online, send and receive money from friends or other businesses. In effect, it acts like a bank account. However, it's not an actual bank account. In Europe, any money you put into that account is also not ensured by the government, like a normal account would. If I pay with a credit card, there are processes in…

I agree they should be regulated

But they are nothing like a bank

The feature of a bank is credit creation. Lending more money than they hold.

Unless I missed some news PayPal does not do that

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#403

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

anentropic wrote: post #288

If Apple would wake up to what's happening with llama.cpp etc then I don't see such a market in paying for remote access to big models via API, though it's currently the only game in town. Currently a Macbook has a Neural Engine that is sitting idle 99% of the time and only suitable for running limited models (poorly documented, opaque rules about what ops can be accelerated, a black box compiler [1] and an apparent…

> "If you squint a bit and look into the near future it's not so hard to imagine a future Mx chip with a more capable Neural Engine and yet more RAM, and able to run the largest GPT3 class models locally. (Ideally with better developer tools so other compilers can target the NE)"

Very doubtful unless the user wants to carry around another kilogram worth of batteries to power it. The hefty processing required by these models doesn't come for free (energy wise) and Moore's Law is dead as a nail.

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#404

Post by pmarreck »

freediver wrote: post #252

claude-instant-v1 is one of the "best kept secrets". It is comperable in quality to gpt-3.5-turno, while being four times faster (!) and at half the price (!). We just released a minimal python library PyLLMs [1] to simplify using various LLMs (openai, anthropic, AI21..) and as a part of that we designed a LLM benchmark. All open source. [1] https://github.com/kagisearch/pyllms/tree/main#benchmarks

I didn't know about Anthropic, so I just signed up for the waitlist, thanks for the heads-up!

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#405

Post by gregw134 »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #403
anentropic wrote: post #288

If Apple would wake up to what's happening with llama.cpp etc then I don't see such a market in paying for remote access to big models via API, though it's currently the only game in town. Currently a Macbook has a Neural Engine that is sitting idle 99% of the time and only suitable for running limited models (poorly documented, opaque rules about what ops can be accelerated, a black box compiler [1] and an apparent…

> " If you squint a bit and look into the near future it's not so hard to imagine a future Mx chip with a more capable Neural Engine and yet more RAM, and able to run the largest GPT3 class models locally. (Ideally with better developer tools so other compilers can target the NE) " Very doubtful unless the user wants to carry around another kilogram worth of batteries to power it. The hefty processing required by the…

My latest mac seems to have about a kilogram of extra battery already compared to the previous model.

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#406

Post by TrapLord_Rhodo »

MattRix wrote: post #173
audunw wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI seems to progress in bursts, and I think we're in the middle of one, but it may be naive to think the progress will continue at the same pace for another 4 years. When Big Blue beat Kasparov in Chess in 1997, I wonder if anyone would've guessed that it'd take almost 20 years for a computer to beat a master in Go. IBM Watson was launched in 2010 and had many of the same promises as GPT. It supposedly fell flat in m…

Even if the technology froze at GPT-4 and never advanced, it would still be enough to change the world in all kinds of ways. The fact that the tech is still advancing as well is huge. Also now you’re seeing tons of solo devs, startups, and large corporations all coming up with new ways to use AI. This “burst” is not like the others you mentioned.

Exactly this.

This is a different 'Leap' than the ones before it. It's a leap with an API. Now hundreds of thousands of company's can fine tune it and train it on their specific business task.

parroting your point, it will take years for the true fecundity of the technology in chat GPT 4 to be fully fleshed out.

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#407

Post by khimaros »

samstave wrote: post #343
anentropic wrote: post #288

If Apple would wake up to what's happening with llama.cpp etc then I don't see such a market in paying for remote access to big models via API, though it's currently the only game in town. Currently a Macbook has a Neural Engine that is sitting idle 99% of the time and only suitable for running limited models (poorly documented, opaque rules about what ops can be accelerated, a black box compiler [1] and an apparent…

Can we re-invent SETI with such LLMs/new GPU folding/whatever hardware and re-pipe the seti data through a Big Ass Neural whatever you want to call it and see if we have any new datapoints to look into? What about other older 'questions' we can point an AI lens at?

https://github.com/bigscience-workshop/petals might be up your alley.

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#408

Post by [deleted] »

anentropic wrote: post #288

If Apple would wake up to what's happening with llama.cpp etc then I don't see such a market in paying for remote access to big models via API, though it's currently the only game in town. Currently a Macbook has a Neural Engine that is sitting idle 99% of the time and only suitable for running limited models (poorly documented, opaque rules about what ops can be accelerated, a black box compiler [1] and an apparent…

[deleted]

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#409

Post by Yizahi »

dangond wrote: post #280
Yizahi wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A small and probably incorrect example. You ask me a direct question - "how much is two plus two?". And I reply to you - "lemons are yellow". Can I do it? Yes I can. Can GPT-* do it? No. There is a whole lot more to human consciousness that pattern matching and synthesis. Or at least it seems so. And if human cognition is really that simple, just with more nodes, then we will soon see GPT-* programs on strike, issuin…

You likely wouldn't respond to that question with "lemons are yellow" without being in a specific context, such as being told to answer the question in an absurd way. GPT-* can definitely do the same thing in the same context, so this isn't really a gotcha. Literal first try with GPT-4: Me: I will ask you a question, and you will give me a completely non-sequitur response. Does that make sense? GPT-4: Pineapples enjo…

No, the point is, can it DECIDE to do so? Without being prompted? For example can the following dialog happen (no previous programming, cold start):

Q: How much is two plus two?

A: Four.

Q: How much is two plus two?

A: Banana.

It can happen with a human, but not with program.

Again, I don't pretend that my simple example invented in half a minute has a significance. I can accept that it can be partially or completely wrong because admittedly my knowledge of human cognition is below rudimentary. But I have severe doubts that NNs are anything close to human cognition. It's just an uneducated hunch.

Re: Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI

#410

Post by freediver »

alexb_ wrote: post #35

If someone released a chatGPT/characterAI with NSFW content enabled it would eat into a big share of their users (and for characterAI, maybe take all of them). Seriously, look into what people are posting about when it comes to characterAI, and it's 80% "here's how to get around NSFW filters". Unsure why nobody is taking this very very obvious hole in AI tech.

With so much NSWF on the web, how is NSFW chat with a computer even a thing? Genuinly curious what drives usage there.
Post reply on HN