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

Google's True Moonshot

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 127 posts

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#81

Post by wslh »

terryf wrote: post #34

Is it possible that google will build the next great AI? Of course. But right now they really really seem to be failing at it. Maybe the core tech in gemini is great. But it's nowhere. Just as an anecdote, I tried to actually pay google for an AI product they claimed to have launched - the image generation, Imagen 2. And apparently, I can't. Even after tens of e-mails and a call with an account manager, the response…

Everyone is in AI now and we are just finishing 2023. The next innovation(s) (dilemma(s)) could happen everywhere. Rephrasing Andreessen's quote: "AI is eating the world". This does not mean that we are close (or not) to AGI, it means that capital is flowing towards AI and AI has REAL applications. Just see what happened in Web3 with not so real applications (but uses). In the cybersecurity space I now see cybersecurity + AI, in the Web3 space I now see AI + Web3. It perfectly could be that Google is the next Altavista for AI.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#82

Post by amadeuspagel »

People act as if there are two companies (Google and Apple) and two business models (ads and selling devices). In fact Google is perfectly capable of charging a subscription in a context where ads don't make sense, like Drive, or even as an alternative, like Youtube Premium. Many people would pay a subscription for an assistant that's actually good, and of course having such an assistant integrated with email and calendar would be extremely valuable.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#83

Post by benjijay »

willvarfar wrote: post #43
carlineng wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is more than that -- namely that in addition to having sophisticated AI, Google also controls the OS (Android) and hardware (Pixel). Being able to integrate best-in-class AI at every level of the stack is a tremendous advantage. OpenAI can't do this because they don't control the OS, and will always need to go through an app. Apple can play since they control OS and hardware, but at the moment they appea…

I'm expecting: * Microsoft to do it for business users * Google pixie does it first for personal use. Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone * Apple eventually get there, for their walled garden * Amazon etc fall totally behind * And, years later, users of google docs are still waiting for basic AI help writing docs whilst google completely doesn't try in that space

Just to be that picky guy; > Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone

Most of the world is already there, and it's not momentary. iPhones only dominate the market in North America - Android has the majority basically everywhere else

As for docs, I can see them pushing for more Gemini integration depending on how M$ Copilot goes when it reaches saturation

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#84

Post by Loughla »

hef19898 wrote: post #58
willvarfar wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm expecting: * Microsoft to do it for business users * Google pixie does it first for personal use. Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone * Apple eventually get there, for their walled garden * Amazon etc fall totally behind * And, years later, users of google docs are still waiting for basic AI help writing docs whilst google completely doesn't try in that space

I know that I'm part of a minority, but I'll avoid touching an "AI" enabled smartphone as long as possible. All privacy issues and tech issues aside, so far I have simply not found a single use case in which AI-tools would make my life easier.

I can see it being wildly popular. Especially if it can edit photos.

Phone, remove the blemish from this picture.

Phone, make my hair slightly more red, and my waist thinner by one inch.

Phone, tell me who that guy in the background of my pictures is.

Phone, what time do I need to leave to get coffee on my way to work.

Those sorts of things.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#85

Post by brap »

bambax wrote: post #77
terryf wrote: post #34

Is it possible that google will build the next great AI? Of course. But right now they really really seem to be failing at it. Maybe the core tech in gemini is great. But it's nowhere. Just as an anecdote, I tried to actually pay google for an AI product they claimed to have launched - the image generation, Imagen 2. And apparently, I can't. Even after tens of e-mails and a call with an account manager, the response…

Does anyone remember Google Video? It was a horrible experience. The upload process was a pain, and I think some approval was needed at some point, or you had to be sponsored by someone already on the service. Then Google bought Youtube. In the AI space it's unclear what/who they could buy -- OpenAI being obviously out of reach -- but it's possible they could find a good match.

>In the AI space it's unclear what/who they could buy

I think Google invested like $2B+ in Anthropic

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#86

Post by rdsubhas »

Big companies drag themselves down – not because they can't innovate – but because they can't go "all in" into innovations which compete against their real cash cow.

An AI assistant fundamentally hits at Google's gut: Search ad revenue. Yeah, Google can make dozens of AI demos. Are they truly ready to put Gemini as the default interaction model, pitting it against their search? Can they give super accurate answers to questions, without the potential of 3 sponsored results on top, in such a way that it would make their search obsolete?

Shareholders "wish" to see competitive demos, to not be left behind, etc. But are shareholders & market ready for a 10% balance sheet revenue drop that comes with making an AI assistant a go-to product instead of search?

AI in Google could end up getting crippled, not by design, but by the environment and "thou shalt not touch search revenue" constraints under which it operates in.

It would be interesting if Alphabet (and Alphabet's moonshots) totally distances itself from Google instead of being an internal structure sharing the same tickers, and treat Gemini as an all-out cannibalistic competitor to Google.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#87

Post by oarsinsync »

benjijay wrote: post #83
willvarfar wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm expecting: * Microsoft to do it for business users * Google pixie does it first for personal use. Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone * Apple eventually get there, for their walled garden * Amazon etc fall totally behind * And, years later, users of google docs are still waiting for basic AI help writing docs whilst google completely doesn't try in that space

Just to be that picky guy; > Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone Most of the world is already there, and it's not momentary. iPhones only dominate the market in North America - Android has the majority basically everywhere else As for docs, I can see them pushing for more Gemini integration depending on how M$ Copilot goes when it reaches saturation

> Just to be that picky guy; > Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone

> Most of the world is already there, and it's not momentary. iPhones only dominate the market in North America - Android has the majority basically everywhere else

Market share is not necessarily proportional to desirability. Cars make a useful analogy here. I think a Ferrari is more desirable than a Volkswagen, but Volkswagen’s market share is much higher.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#88

Post by gwicks56 »

hef19898 wrote: post #78
kolinko wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As for privacy - Apple does most, if not all AI processing on-device. E.g. Siri understands voice commands when offline (although may work worse then I think). A good on-device assistant would be super useful: - instead of searching for a setting, you just tell it to change a device setting - decent appointment/reminder setting ("remind me to invite joe to my next birthday party" -> and it knows who Joe is, and how t…

As I said, while this is usefull for others, I have zero need for any of this. Settings? I know where to find those. Setting alerts? Use the standard calendar and timer apps. Internet search? Type it. I make a point to not share my search history with anyobe, or any other data as much as possible. And I wont start doing so to enable some AI gadget I am more than happy to live without.

I think it will be more like:

"Pixie, reply to that email for me"

"Pixie, book that car service for me and remind them they promised a free brake fluid replacement"

"Pixie order all the ingredients I need to make my wife her favourite dish"

"Pixel, buy everyone in my family birthday presents"

I will 100% pay for that capability, and as someone that uses GPT4 to basically do my job for me, it really does not seem that far off. And I do think Google has an advantage here over Apple or anyone else, not just in Hardware, but in the enormous amount of data and information they have about both people in general, and specifically me.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#89

Post by hutzlibu »

rdsubhas wrote: post #86

Big companies drag themselves down – not because they can't innovate – but because they can't go "all in" into innovations which compete against their real cash cow. An AI assistant fundamentally hits at Google's gut: Search ad revenue. Yeah, Google can make dozens of AI demos. Are they truly ready to put Gemini as the default interaction model, pitting it against their search? Can they give super accurate answers to…

"Are they truly ready to put Gemini as the default interaction model, pitting it against their search?"

Probably not, since they have not figured out, how to integrate the ads into the AI.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#90

Post by infecto »

brap wrote: post #85
bambax wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone remember Google Video? It was a horrible experience. The upload process was a pain, and I think some approval was needed at some point, or you had to be sponsored by someone already on the service. Then Google bought Youtube. In the AI space it's unclear what/who they could buy -- OpenAI being obviously out of reach -- but it's possible they could find a good match.

>In the AI space it's unclear what/who they could buy I think Google invested like $2B+ in Anthropic

Anthropic feels very much like google though. It took me 6 months to get access, once I finally did it was only a testing type account that then requires me to talk to sales before they take my credit card.

On the other hand OpenAI has been quick to take money. Mistral too, got an account immediately and able to add billing details and they don’t even have a usage page so I have no idea how much I have burned through.

Post reply on HN