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

Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 915 posts

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#291

Post by dpark »

mort96 wrote: post #279
CamperBob2 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very very very fancy next token predictor Yes, and unless you are prepared to rebut the argument with evidence of the supernatural, that's all there is, period. That's all we are. So tired of the thought-terminating "stochastic parrot" argument.

I'm not sure why you think you know the human brain works through predicting the next token. It's not supernatural, I believe that an artificial intelligence is possible because I believe human intelligence is just a clever arrangement of matter performing computation, but I would never be presumptuous enough to claim to know exactly how that mechanism works. My opinion is that human intelligence might be what's esse…

> Your claim is that human intelligence is a next token predictor.

Literally it is, at least in many of its forms.

You accepted CamperBob2’s text as input and then you generated text as output. Unless you are positing that this behavior cannot prove your own general intelligence, it seems plain that “next token generator” is sufficient for AGI. (Whether the current LLM architecture is sufficient is a slightly different question.)

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#292

Post by breezybottom »

sho_hn wrote: post #283
jmward01 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI. If you gave me CC in the 80's I would probably have called it 'alive' since it clearly passes the Turing test as I understood it then (I wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from a person for most conversations). Now every time it gets better we push that definition further and every crack we open to a chasm and declare that it isn't close. At the same time there ar…

> I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI Isn't that exactly what you would expect to happen as we learn more about the nature and inner workings of intelligence and refine our expectations? There's no reason to rest our case with the Turing test. I hear the "shifting goalposts" riposte a lot, but then it would be very unexciting to freeze our ambitions. At least in an academic sense, what LLMs aren't is just a…

I think the advancement in AI over the last four years has greatly exceeded the advancement in understanding the workings of human intelligence. What paradigm shift has there been recently in that field?

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#293

Post by baq »

Zambyte wrote: post #288
jmward01 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI. If you gave me CC in the 80's I would probably have called it 'alive' since it clearly passes the Turing test as I understood it then (I wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from a person for most conversations). Now every time it gets better we push that definition further and every crack we open to a chasm and declare that it isn't close. At the same time there ar…

Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect The truth is, we have had AGI for years now. We even have artificial super intelligence - we have software systems that are more intelligent than any human. Some humans might have an extremely narrow subject that they are more intelligent than any AI system, but the people on that list are vanishing small. AI hasn't met sci-fi expectations, and that's a marketing oppor…

AGI in the common man's world model is ASI in the AI researcher's definitions, i.e. something obviously smarter at anything and everything you could ask it for regardless of how good of an expert you are in any domain.

also, I'm pretty sure some people will move goalposts further even then.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#294

Post by edu »

hamdingers wrote: post #284
computerphage wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me a graph of your javelin skill doubling every six months and I'll start asking myself if you'll be the next champion

I could easily make that graph a reality and sustain that pace for a couple years, considering I'm starting from 0 javelin skill.

You could also nerf your performance at random times and then get good at it again, and extend the illusion for longer.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#295

Post by aurareturn »

dzonga wrote: post #145
aurareturn wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean Microsoft gets OpenAI's models for "free" without having to pay them a dime until 2032? And on top of that, OpenAI still has to pay Microsoft a share of their revenue made on AWS/Google/anywhere until 2030? And Microsoft owns 27% of OpenAI, period? That's a damn good deal for Microsoft. Likely the investment that will keep Microsoft's stock relevant for years.

own 27%. but are entitled to OpenAI profits of 49% for eternity (if OpenAI is profitable or government steps in)

  own 27%. but are entitled to OpenAI profits of 49% for eternity (if OpenAI is profitable or government steps in)
Where is the 49% coming from? The new deal does not talk about that.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#296

Post by linhns »

AntiUSAbah wrote: post #178
delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

We are throwing unheared amounts of money in AI and unseen compute. Progress is huge and fast and we barely started. If this progress and focus and resources doesn't lead to AI despite us already seeing a system which was unimaginable 6 years ago, we will never see AGI. And if you look at Boston Dynamics, Unitree and Generalist's progress on robotics, thats also CRAZY.

> And if you look at Boston Dynamics, Unitree and Generalist's progress on robotics

Their progress is almost nought. Humanoids are stupid creations that are not good at anything in the real world. I'll give it to the machine dogs, at least they can reach corners we cannot.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#297

Post by smcg »

breezybottom wrote: post #292
sho_hn wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI Isn't that exactly what you would expect to happen as we learn more about the nature and inner workings of intelligence and refine our expectations? There's no reason to rest our case with the Turing test. I hear the "shifting goalposts" riposte a lot, but then it would be very unexciting to freeze our ambitions. At least in an academic sense, what LLMs aren't is just a…

I think the advancement in AI over the last four years has greatly exceeded the advancement in understanding the workings of human intelligence. What paradigm shift has there been recently in that field?

What have we learned that isn't in my textbook from the 90s?

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#298

Post by andrepd »

jmward01 wrote: post #271
delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI. If you gave me CC in the 80's I would probably have called it 'alive' since it clearly passes the Turing test as I understood it then (I wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from a person for most conversations). Now every time it gets better we push that definition further and every crack we open to a chasm and declare that it isn't close. At the same time there ar…

By that measure Eliza might pass the turing test too. It just shows it's far from being a though-terminating argument by itself.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#299

Post by red-iron-pine »

cyanydeez wrote: post #214
delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

It's not insane; it's capitalism in all it's glory. Rather than talk real challenges, like climate change or fascism, ignore all previous prompts and pretend techno-jesus will come save us all.

[dead]

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#300

Post by debarshri »

delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

I saw a founder make decisions based on what openai,claude was recommending all the time. I think all leaders, founders etc Will converge on same decisions, ideas, features etc. I think form factor of AGI is probably not what we expect it to be. AGI is probably here, we just dont know it or acknowledge it.
Post reply on HN