Live data from Hacker News

It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

stratechery.com

131–140 of 284 posts

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cash is just paper. You can't eat paper.

You can't eat AI, either. Yet another hidden benefit of a human workforce, that AI can't match.

It seems to me that you're suggesting cannablism, but maybe I'm reading you wrong?

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#132

I don't like Ed Zitron automatic dismissal of everything AI and the constant profanities in his writing are getting old, and it's usually not very well structured, but that said... I like the perspective he has about the money involved. https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-case-against-generative-ai/ OpenAI needs 1 trillion dollars in next four years just to keep existing. That's more than all currently available capital,…

You could literally eliminate homelessness, world hunger, and fully pay health care costs in that same timeframe with much less cash.

Homelessness and world hunger are not bottlenecked by money. There's a stronger case for healthcare, but that's also substantially a political issue.

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cash is just paper. You can't eat paper.

You can't eat AI, either. Yet another hidden benefit of a human workforce, that AI can't match.

You mean like, at least we can eat the human workforce?

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think they will get any moat. I might be wrong on this of course, but I don’t see a killer feature for these stochastic parrots that can’t be easily replicated

> … stochastic parrots… What a wonderful phrase, mind if I borrow it?

"the term stochastic parrot is a metaphor, introduced by Emily M. Bender and colleagues in a 2021 paper, that frames large language models as systems that statistically mimic text without real understanding"

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3442188.3445922

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#135

I don't like Ed Zitron automatic dismissal of everything AI and the constant profanities in his writing are getting old, and it's usually not very well structured, but that said... I like the perspective he has about the money involved. https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-case-against-generative-ai/ OpenAI needs 1 trillion dollars in next four years just to keep existing. That's more than all currently available capital,…

I like reading Zitron’s output, but this remark stood out to me as him weighing in on a domain he’s basically clueless about.

Spread across 4 years, there’s way more than $1tn in available private capital. Berkshire Hathaway alone has 1/3 of that sitting in a cash pile right now. You don’t have to look at many balance sheets to see that the big tech companies are all also sitting on huge piles of cash.

I don’t personally believe OAI can raise that money. But the money exists.

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#136
post #109

Platforms usually deliver significant value that is hard to replicate. OpenAI doesn't have any such thing. It's trivially replaced, and there's many competitors already. OpenAI is ahead of the curve, but they don't seem to have any particular way to do sticky capture. Migrating to a different LLM is an afternoon's work at most, not nearly the complexity of porting an app between OS' or creating a robust hardware driv…

A lot of the points also apply to Google as a search engine, yet we're still seeing Google owning about 90% of search engine usage.

Google is a product not a platform. How many companies are still using Google search for their intranets? (yes yes I'm old, don't remind me)

Meanwhile bing search is actually a platform, and is what then powers other "search engines" (duckduckgo, kagi, etc...)

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#137
post #79

Platforms usually deliver significant value that is hard to replicate. OpenAI doesn't have any such thing. It's trivially replaced, and there's many competitors already. OpenAI is ahead of the curve, but they don't seem to have any particular way to do sticky capture. Migrating to a different LLM is an afternoon's work at most, not nearly the complexity of porting an app between OS' or creating a robust hardware driv…

Much of the value I get from ChatGPT is based on it's memory system that has a good profile on me. For example if I ask it to find me something to eat at X restaurant, it will already know my allergies, dietary preferences, weight goals, medications, other foods I like, etc and suggest an item based on that, all workout me explicitly telling it. Moving from ChatGPT to Claude I would lose a lot of this valuable histor…

You could literally ask it to write out everything it knows about you into a form usable in a CLAUDE.md file, put that in the directory you're using e.g. claude code in, and boom.

No moat.

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the social network that is currently dying the same death as countless other platforms before it, just on a larger scale? Maybe some are too young to remember the great migrations from/to MySpace, MSN, ICQ, AIM, Skype, local alternatives like StudiVZ, ..., where people used to keep in contact with friends. Facebook was just the latest and largest platform where people kept in touch and expressed themselves i…

Last time I checked 99% of normies are still happily scrolling FB and Instagram

FB in particular is becoming deader and deader every month, and it's only a matter of time before something else comes along that sucks their attention away.

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't eat AI, either. Yet another hidden benefit of a human workforce, that AI can't match.

It seems to me that you're suggesting cannablism, but maybe I'm reading you wrong?

It does seem like a rather modest proposal.

Re: It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it

#140
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's saying more than that the companies are going to collapse; he's making pronouncements about the underlying technology, which are claims that are much harder to defend. I'm not entirely sure he understands the distinction between the companies and the technology, though.

Respectably...what?? Ed at this point is one of the most well read people on Earth for this topic. Of course he knows the difference between the companies and the technology. He goes in depth both on why he think the companies are financially unviable AND why he's unimpressed by LLM's technologically alllll the time.

Having a large audience does not imply being the most well informed or correct.
Post reply on HN