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

Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

shloked.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 240 posts

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#151

Post by simianwords »

0xCMP wrote: post #61
spongebobstoes wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why do you see a "clear directionality" leading to ads? this is not obvious to me. chatgpt is not social media, they do not have to monetize in the same way they are making plenty of money from subscriptions, not to count enterprise, business and API

One has a more obvious route to building a profile directly off that already collected data. And while they are making lots of revenue even they have admitted on recent interviews that ChatGPT on it's own is still not (yet) breakeven. With the kind of money invested, in AI companies in general, introducing very targeted Ads is an obvious way to monetize the service more.

This is incorrect understanding of unit economics. They are not breaking even only because of reinvestment into r and d.

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#152

Post by simianwords »

qgin wrote: post #4

I love Claude's memory implementation, but I turned memory off in ChatGPT. I use ChatGPT for too many disparate things and it was weird when it was making associations across things that aren't actually associated in my life.

Memory is by far the best feature in ChatGPT and it is the only reason I keep using it. I want it to be personalised and I want it to use information about me when needed.

For example: I could create memories related to a project of mine and don’t have to give every new chat context about the project. This is a massive quality of life improvement.

But I am not a big fan of the conversation memory created in background that I have no control over.

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#153

Post by forgotoldacc »

GuB-42 wrote: post #106
Workaccount2 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't fool yourself into thinking Anthropic won't be serving up personalized ads too.

Anthropic seems to want to make you buy a subscription, not show you ads. ChatGPT seems to be more popular to those who don't want to pay, and they are therefore more likely to rely on ads.

In the 2020s, subscriptions don't preclude showing ads. Companies will milk money in as many ways as they can

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#154

Post by extr »

shloked wrote: post #123
extr wrote: post #13

They are changing the way memory works soon, too: https://x.com/btibor91/status/1965906564692541621 Edit: They apparently just announced this as well: https://www.anthropic.com/news/memory

Thanks for sharing this! Seems like I chose exactly the wrong day to write this

It's still very relevant, especially considering their new approach is closer to ChatGPT. But I find it very interesting they're not launching it to regular consumers yet, only teams/enterprise, it seems for safety reasons. It would be great if they could thread the needle here and some up with something in between the two approaches.

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#155

Post by withinboredom »

fluidcruft wrote: post #92
withinboredom wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can’t learn or think unless prompted, then it is given a very small slice of time to respond and then it stops. Forever. Any past conversations are never “thought” of again. It has no intelligence. Intelligence implies thinking and it isn’t doing that. It’s not notifying you at 3am to say “oh hey, remember that thing we were talking about. I think I have a better solution!” No. It isn’t thinking. It doesn’t unders…

It sounds like you are saying the only difference is that human stimulus streams don't shut on and off? If you were put into a medically induced coma, you probably shouldn't be consider intelligent either.

I think that’s a valid assessment of my argument, but it goes further than just “always on”. There’s an old book called On Intelligence that asked these kinds of questions 20+ years ago (of AI), I don’t remember the details, but a large part of what makes something intelligent doesn’t just boil down to what you know and how well you can articulate it.

For example, we as humans aren’t even present in the moment — different stimuli take different lengths of time to reach our brain, so our brain creates a synthesis of “now” that isn’t even real. You can’t even play Table Tennis unless you can predict up to one second in the future with enough details to be in the right place to hit the ball the ball before you hit the ball to your opponent.

Meanwhile, an AI will go off-script during code changes, without running it by the human. It should be able to easily predict the human is going to say “wtaf” when it doesn’t do what is asked, and handle that potential case BEFORE it’s an issue. That’s ultimately what makes something intelligent: the ability to predict the future, anticipate issues, and handle them.

No AI currently does this.

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#157

Post by swiftcoder »

furyofantares wrote: post #130
cj wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that’s the case, we have an even bigger problem on our hands. How will these companies ever be profitable? If we’re already paying $20/mo and they’re operating at a loss, what’s the next move (assuming we’re only worth an extra $300/yr with ads?) The math doesn’t add up, unless we stop training new models and degrade the ones currently in production, or have some compute breakthrough that makes hardware + operatin…

> If we’re already paying $20/mo and they’re operating at a loss I'm quite confident they're not operating at a loss on those subscriptions.

They are running at a massive loss overall - feels pretty safe to assume that they wouldn't be if their cheapest subscription tier was breaking even

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#158

Post by swiftcoder »

zer00eyz wrote: post #56
Workaccount2 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't fool yourself into thinking Anthropic won't be serving up personalized ads too.

Claude: "What is my purpose?" Anthropic: "You serve ad's." Claude: "Oh, my god." Jest asside, every paper on alignment wrapped in the blanket of safety is also a moving toward the goal of alignment to products. How much does a brand pay to make sure it gets placement in, say, GPT6? How does anyone even price that sort of thing (because in theory it's there forever, or until 7 comes out)? It makes for some interesting…

Ads aren't going to be trained into the model. They'll be an ads backend that the model queries with a set of topic tags, just like in traditional web advertising.

Re: Claude’s memory architecture is the opposite of ChatGPT’s

#160

Post by shloked »

extr wrote: post #154
shloked wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing this! Seems like I chose exactly the wrong day to write this

It's still very relevant, especially considering their new approach is closer to ChatGPT. But I find it very interesting they're not launching it to regular consumers yet, only teams/enterprise, it seems for safety reasons. It would be great if they could thread the needle here and some up with something in between the two approaches.

Going to dive deeper!
Post reply on HN