121–130 of 915 posts
This gives OpenAI the ability to goto AWS instead of exclusively on Azure. I guess Azure really is hanging on by a thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
And Azure still doesn't support IPv6, looking at the GitHub[1]. [1] https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539
This gives OpenAI the ability to goto AWS instead of exclusively on Azure. I guess Azure really is hanging on by a thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
And Azure still doesn't support IPv6, looking at the GitHub[1]. [1] https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539
Nadella had OpenAI by the short and curlies early on. But all I've seen from him in the last couple of years is continuously acquiescing to OpenAI's demands. I wonder why he's so weak and doesn't exert more control over the situation? At one point Microsoft owned 49% of OpenAI but now it's down to 27%?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were paying them 20% of the revenue from the hosted OpenAI products I believe?
Does this mean they will host OpenAI products but not pay them? Or does it mean they are paying them in some other way?
Nadella had OpenAI by the short and curlies early on. But all I've seen from him in the last couple of years is continuously acquiescing to OpenAI's demands. I wonder why he's so weak and doesn't exert more control over the situation? At one point Microsoft owned 49% of OpenAI but now it's down to 27%?
But if I own 49% of a company and that company has more hype than product, hasn't found its market yet but is valued at trillions?
I'm going to sell percentages of that to build my war chest for things that actually hit my bottom line.
The "moonshot" has for all intents and purposes been achieved based on the valuation, and at that valuation: OpenAI has to completely crush all competition... basically just to meet its current valuations.
It would be a really fiscally irresponsible move not to hedge your bets.
Not that it matters but we did something similar with the donated bitcoin on my project. When bitcoin hit a "new record high" we sold half. Then held the remainder until it hit a "new record high" again.
Sure, we could have 'maxxed profit!'; but ultimately it did its job, it was an effective donation/investment that had reasonably maximal returns.
(that said, I do not believe in crypto as an investment opportunity, it's merely the hand I was dealt by it being donated).
Wait, I thought OpenAI had to pay Microsoft until AGI was achieved or something? Am I misremembering? Is that a different thing?
Nadella had OpenAI by the short and curlies early on. But all I've seen from him in the last couple of years is continuously acquiescing to OpenAI's demands. I wonder why he's so weak and doesn't exert more control over the situation? At one point Microsoft owned 49% of OpenAI but now it's down to 27%?
Everything is personal preference, and perhaps I am more fiscally conservative because I grew up in poverty. But if I own 49% of a company and that company has more hype than product, hasn't found its market yet but is valued at trillions? I'm going to sell percentages of that to build my war chest for things that actually hit my bottom line. The "moonshot" has for all intents and purposes been achieved based on the…
And Microsoft only paid $10B for that stake for the most recognizable name brand for AI around the world. They don't need to "hedge their bets" it's already a humongous win.
Why let Altman continue to call the shots and decrease Microsoft's ownership stake and ability to dictate how OpenAI helps Microsoft and not the other way around?
This gives OpenAI the ability to goto AWS instead of exclusively on Azure. I guess Azure really is hanging on by a thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
And Azure still doesn't support IPv6, looking at the GitHub[1]. [1] https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539
They still run their own platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They redefined AGI to be an economical thing, so they can continue making up their stories. All that talk is really just business, no real science in the room there.
> They redefined AGI to be an economical thing Huh. Source? I mean, typical OpenAI bullshit, but would love to know how they defined it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything is personal preference, and perhaps I am more fiscally conservative because I grew up in poverty. But if I own 49% of a company and that company has more hype than product, hasn't found its market yet but is valued at trillions? I'm going to sell percentages of that to build my war chest for things that actually hit my bottom line. The "moonshot" has for all intents and purposes been achieved based on the…
Microsoft didn't sell anything. OpenAI created more shares and sold those to investors, so Microsoft's stake is getting diluted. And Microsoft only paid $10B for that stake for the most recognizable name brand for AI around the world. They don't need to "hedge their bets" it's already a humongous win. Why let Altman continue to call the shots and decrease Microsoft's ownership stake and ability to dictate how OpenAI…