Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal • Hacker News Board

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

#341

Post by robotresearcher » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:49 PM UTC

dbbk wrote: post #328

latexr wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing OpenAI and Microsoft do (did?) have a quantifiable definition of AGI, it’s just a stupid one that is hard to take seriously and get behind scientifically. https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/26/microsoft-and-openai-have-... > The two companies reportedly signed an agreement last year stating OpenAI has only achieved AGI when it develops AI systems that can generate at le…

I bet they were laughing their asses off when they came up with that. This is nonsensical.

In the context of raising money and justifying investment?

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

#342

Post by mort96 » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:50 PM UTC

AntiUSAbah wrote: post #335

mort96 wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before I start typing, I think abstractly about the topic and decide on what I shall write in response. Due to the linear nature of time, typing necessarily happens one word at a time, but I am never producing a probability distribution of words (at least not in a way that my conscious self can determine), I consider an entire idea and then decide what tokens to enter into the computer in order to communicate the ide…

But a LLM shows similiar effects. COCONUT, PCCoT, PLaT and co are directly linked to 'thinking in latent space'. yann lecun is working on this too, we have JEPA now. Also how do you describe or explain how an LLM is generating the next token when it should add a feature to an existing code base? In my opinion it has structures which allows it to create a temp model of that code. For sure a LLM lack the emotional comp…

I don't understand what part of what I said you disagree with.

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

#343

Post by CamperBob2 » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:50 PM UTC

godshatter wrote: post #336

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.

Do LLMs even learn? The companies that build them build new models based partly on the conversations the older models have had with people, but do they incorporate knowledge into their neural nets as they go along? Can an LLM decide, without prompting or api calls, to text someone or go read about something or do anything at all except for waiting for the next prompt? Do LLMs have any conceptual understanding of anyt…

Yes, to all of your questions. You need to use a recent LLM in an agentic harness. Tell it to take notes, and it will.

After a bit of further refinement, we'll start to call that process "learning." Eventually the question of who owns the notes, who gets to update them, and how, will become a huge, huge deal.

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

#344

Post by AntiUSAbah » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:50 PM UTC

bigfishrunning wrote: post #242

AntiUSAbah wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which ones? At least in the last 4 years, there was no AI winter.

The late 70s, again in the late 80s. See wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_winter

Yeah and if you look at the blocking factors at that time (data, compute) these type of limits currently are non existend.

There is a difference to be acknowledged: in the 70s/80s the whole world didn't suddenly start to shift to AI right?

So why do so many smart and/or rich people push this? Hype? Yeah sure but hype was here for crypto too.

I bet its an undelying understanding and the right time with the right components: Massive capital for playing this game long enough to see through the required initial investment, internet for fast data sharing, massive compute for the amount of data and compute you need, real live business relevant results (it already disrupts jobs) etc.

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

#345

Post by turtlesdown11 » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:50 PM UTC

AntiUSAbah wrote: post #197

mort96 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm reading you right, your opinion is essentially: "If building bigger and bigger statistical next word predictors won't lead to artificial general intelligence, we will never see artificial general intelligence" I don't know, maybe AGI is possible but there's more to intelligence than statistical next word prediction?

Its not a statistical next word predictor. The 'predicting the next word' is the learning mechanism of the LLM which leads to a latent space which can encode higher level concepts. Basically a LLM 'understands' that much as efficient as it has to be to be able to respond in a reasonable way. A LLM doesn't predict german text or chinese language. It predicts the concept and than has a language layer outputting tokens.…

> Its not a statistical next word predictor.

it absolutely is a next word predictor

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

#346

Post by elpakal » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:51 PM UTC

chasd00 wrote: post #88

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

Confirmed by Andy Jassy just now https://www.linkedin.com/posts/andy-jassy-8b1615_very-intere...

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

#347

Post by CamperBob2 » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:51 PM UTC

mort96 wrote: post #305

dpark wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 differe…

Before I start typing, I think abstractly about the topic and decide on what I shall write in response. Due to the linear nature of time, typing necessarily happens one word at a time, but I am never producing a probability distribution of words (at least not in a way that my conscious self can determine), I consider an entire idea and then decide what tokens to enter into the computer in order to communicate the ide…

Before I start typing, I think abstractly about the topic

Before you start typing, an fMRI machine can tell you which finger you'll lift first, before you know it yourself.

We are not special. Consciousness is literally a continuous hallucination that we make up to explain what we do and what we think, after the fact. A machine can be trained to behave identically, but it's not clear if that's the best way forward or not.

Edit due to rate limiting: to answer your question, the substrate your mind uses to drive this process can be considered an array of tokens that, themselves, can be considered 'words.'

It's hard to link sources -- what am I supposed to do, send you to Chomsky and other authorities who have predicted none of what's happening and who clearly understand even less?

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

#348

Post by AntiUSAbah » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:52 PM UTC

bigfishrunning wrote: post #243

AntiUSAbah wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self-driving had never the amount of compute, research adoption and money than what the current overall AI has. Its not comparable. Crypto was flawed from the beginning and lots of people didn't understood it properly. Not even that a blockchain can't secure a transaction from something outside of a blockchain.

The LLMs are flawed, and lots of people don't understand them properly.

People are researching how to make LLMs more stable and from a statistic point of view, we already now down to 10% (progress is made here).

LLMs don't have to be perfect, they just need to be as good as humans and cheaper or easier to manage.

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

#349

Post by fsniper » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:52 PM UTC

measurablefunc wrote: post #316

johnfn wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s insane to me how yesterday someone posted an example of ChatGPT Pro one-shotting an Erdos problem after 90 minutes of thinking and today you’re saying that AGI is a fairy tale.

It's not one-shot. Other people had attempted the same problem w/ the same AI & failed. You're confused about terms so you redefine them to make your version of the fairy tale real.

We already know that same problem has been examined by many credible mathematicians already and couldn't be solved by any of them yet.

Why are we expecting AGI to one shot it? Can't we have an AGI that can fails occasionally to solve some math problem? Is the expectation of AGI to be all knowing?

By the way I agree that AGI is not around the corner or I am not arguing any of the llm s are "thinking machines". It's just I agree goal post or posts needs to be set well.

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

#350

Post by latexr » Mon, Apr 27, 2026, 5:52 PM UTC

lesuorac wrote: post #318

snek_case wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The metaverse is another example if anyone doubts the bounds of corporate stupidity.

Why? FaceBook largely requires an Apple iPhone, Apple computer, "Microsoft" computer, "Google" phone, or a "Google" computer to use it. At any point one of those companies could cut FaceBook off (ex. [1]). The Metaverse was a long term goal to get people onto a device (Occulus) that Meta controlled. While I think an AR device is much more useful than VR; I'm not convinced that it's a mistake for Meta to peruse not be…

> I'm not convinced that it's a mistake for Meta to peruse not being beholden to other platforms.

Devoid of other context, it’s hard to disagree. But your parent comment only asserted that the metaverse specifically as proposed by Facebook was an obviously stupid idea.