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

OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 158 posts

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#121

Post by eventualcomp »

gobdovan wrote: post #111
fabian2k wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't mention anything about SLAs. This is about all the time, effort, paperwork and risk it takes to add yet another vendor. Having fewer vendors does actually reduce risk, as long as your chosen vendors are reasonably good. Though the bigger reason is certainly avoiding the additional bureaucracy, which is partly self-inflicted in larger companies but also not without merit.

Yeah, I understood the original point. And I'm tired of it. I'm just tired of the 'everyone follows their immediate incentives while the system stays incoherent' as the de facto reality. I think shedding some light over the actual mechanics would maybe make someone consider 'perhaps we shouldn't allow our acquisition team just turn off their brain and choose the default to cover their bottoms; maybe vendors are worth…

Praise be the accountability sink. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41891694

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#122

Post by gobdovan »

alchemism wrote: post #119
gobdovan wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I understood the original point. And I'm tired of it. I'm just tired of the 'everyone follows their immediate incentives while the system stays incoherent' as the de facto reality. I think shedding some light over the actual mechanics would maybe make someone consider 'perhaps we shouldn't allow our acquisition team just turn off their brain and choose the default to cover their bottoms; maybe vendors are worth…

The politics of multimillion dollar contracts for public clouds go far, far, far beyond the preferences of an acquisition team, or what the engineers may think.

This is too vague to respond to meaningfully.

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#123

Post by gobdovan »

johndhi wrote: post #112
gobdovan wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I understood the original point. And I'm tired of it. I'm just tired of the 'everyone follows their immediate incentives while the system stays incoherent' as the de facto reality. I think shedding some light over the actual mechanics would maybe make someone consider 'perhaps we shouldn't allow our acquisition team just turn off their brain and choose the default to cover their bottoms; maybe vendors are worth…

Which vendor would you rather use in this context, with your sensitive customer data? -vendor A's list of sub-processors is a mile long and includes providers of questionable repute; -vendor B's list is short and includes AWS and GCP

[flagged]

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#124

Post by hectormalot »

johndhi wrote: post #112
gobdovan wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I understood the original point. And I'm tired of it. I'm just tired of the 'everyone follows their immediate incentives while the system stays incoherent' as the de facto reality. I think shedding some light over the actual mechanics would maybe make someone consider 'perhaps we shouldn't allow our acquisition team just turn off their brain and choose the default to cover their bottoms; maybe vendors are worth…

Which vendor would you rather use in this context, with your sensitive customer data? -vendor A's list of sub-processors is a mile long and includes providers of questionable repute; -vendor B's list is short and includes AWS and GCP

We have a vendor with almost no subprocessors because they run their own hardware in a colo.

It is refreshing actually. They can accurately answer questions on how everything works and there is no subsubsubprocessors to worry about.

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#125

Post by mitchitized »

IMTDb wrote: post #110
petesergeant wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they the only people allowed to fire someone?

What GP meant is that the CTO of a $1b company wold absolutely not fire someone for going Azure because at those scale it's very likely they have a set of customers that exclusively want to work on Azure, so that choice makes sense. It's easy to do blanket statements like "never choose azure", "avoid GCP at all cost" or "never again on AWS". Until real world comes your way and you are forced to deal with it. That bei…

Another reality is that at that scale you need to diversify your vendor portfolio so you never get stuck in a single-vendor scenario (for contracts, liability or scale). Many companies half this size have infrastructure across all three - AWS, Azure and GCP. The primary reason is redundancy, but that also gives them potential leverage for contract negotiation.

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#126

Post by gobdovan »

hectormalot wrote: post #124
johndhi wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which vendor would you rather use in this context, with your sensitive customer data? -vendor A's list of sub-processors is a mile long and includes providers of questionable repute; -vendor B's list is short and includes AWS and GCP

We have a vendor with almost no subprocessors because they run their own hardware in a colo. It is refreshing actually. They can accurately answer questions on how everything works and there is no subsubsubprocessors to worry about.

I think he's arguing about OpenAI vendoring specifically, where OpenAI has a lot of subprocessors, but AWS doesn't and there's not really a 3rd camp to choose from, yet. But even there you can't just choose AWS as I tried to illustrate in uncle comment.

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#129

Post by philipwhiuk »

sntran wrote: post #48
kylemaxwell wrote: post #38

Every time somebody questions why you might "trust" AWS (or Azure or GCP or whatever), or why you'd pay this premium, I realize they are not accustomed to working in enterprise environments. In my case, I work at a large enterprise with strict data governance built into customer contracts, and (partly related, partly not) our own governance concerns. Using vendors where you not only have infosec permission, but they…

I have just moved from a free environment in which I was able to use any AI harnesses or models to a strict enterprise environment. I was shocked to realize how difficult it has been to have a GitHub CoPilot license on Azure. I mean, they're both Microsoft products. But no, the IT now has to figure out how to set up a GitHub enterprise, link to Azure subscription, and all that.

and set reasonable global and user token limits to avoid burning a year's IT spend cause Dave in Legal went ham on tokenmaxxing by uploading his entire legal case history.

in a company of 12 you can do that by saying 'we're all generalists, just don't be an idiot'. In a company of 10,000, you hired Dave cause he's good at legal merger mumbo jumbo not because he's an IT generalist.

Re: OpenAI frontier models and Codex are now available on AWS

#130

Post by stymaar »

a_bonobo wrote: post #46
ykl wrote: post #10

If you've used AI coding models in a large corporate setting, you'll know that a lot of big corporate deployments basically require using AWS Bedrock for two simple reasons: 1. Large companies tend to already have an existing relationship with AWS, which makes things way easier to go through vs. setting up a new vendor relationship 2. Large companies tend to have strong internal requirements about making sure that in…

3. from my opportunity - For many (not all) LLMs, Bedrock gives you control over which country the data stays in. You have no control over that with the Claude API, for example. We do not work in the US and have strong requirements for the data to stay in our country, which Bedrock gives us control over.

> We do not work in the US and have strong requirements for the data to stay in our country, which Bedrock gives us control over.

It doesn't actually. The US can request data from whatever country US companies store it, and companies must comply.

So if you have strong requirements for data to stay in your country, using a US provider, whatever it is, is out of question no matter what the company's marketing claims (they are not maintaining these claims under oath for what it's worth: https://www.senat.fr/compte-rendu-commissions/20250609/ce_co... )

Post reply on HN