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

Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 507 posts

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#141

Post by JumpCrisscross »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #134
rybosome wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scale has also built massive amounts of proprietary datasets that they license to the big players in training. Meta, Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, etc. all use Scale data in training. So, the play I’m guessing is to shut that tap off for everyone else now, and double down on using Scale to generate more proprietary datasets.

Isn’t this monopolistic?

> Isn’t this monopolistic?

By whom? The fact that there is a list of competitors means Meta has no monopoly in AI. And Scale AI has no monopoly in labelled data.

It’s anticompetitive. But probably not to an illegal extent. Every “moat” is, after all, a measure in anticompetitiveness.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#142

Post by ahoyhoy »

vonneumannstan wrote: post #105

I'm really not sure why they are acquihiring a digital sweatshop owner. It's not obvious that Wang has any special insight or expertise related to building a Superintelligence other than Data Annotation...

Scale's data annotation platform Outlier is managed with tragicomic, DOGE-style incompetence. It has been in failure mode since around January.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#143

Post by 7moritz7 »

vonneumannstan wrote: post #105

I'm really not sure why they are acquihiring a digital sweatshop owner. It's not obvious that Wang has any special insight or expertise related to building a Superintelligence other than Data Annotation...

He knows what data cohere, openai and anthropic commission which is a major advantage and I doubt they'll continue relying on scale ai

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#144

Post by JumpCrisscross »

vonneumannstan wrote: post #116
deviation wrote: post #81

Reminds me of "Don't dig for the gold, sell the shovels". Could also be read: > Meta spends 10% of last year's revenue to acquire 49% of a top AI data company and poach their leadership, to ensure they are a key player in what could be a ~5-trillion dollar industry by 2033. Meta has a history of this. Acquiring Oculus (and leaning in on VR), Ray-Ban partnership (and leaning in on AR)... etc. These all just seem like…

Of course the actual shovels are GPUs in this case... so it makes your analogy even stranger.

> the actual shovels are GPUs in this case

This deal brings into focus whether the shovels are data or GPUs. Advantage to data comes, surprisingly, in perishability: a GPU fleet remains cutting edge for only one product cycle.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#146

Post by paxys »

ml-anon wrote: post #85

The only way to understand this is by knowing: Meta already has two (!!) AI labs who are already at existential odds with one-another and both are in the process of failing spectacularly. One (FAIR) is lead by Rob Fergus (who? exactly!) because the previous lead quit. Relatively little gossip on that one other than top AI labs have their pick of outgoing talent. The other (GenAI) is lead by Ahmad Al-Dahle (who? exact…

This is exactly why Zuck feels he needs a Sam Altman type in charge. They have the labs, the researchers, the GPUs, and unlimited cash to burn. Yet it takes more than all that to drive outcomes. Llama 4 is fine but still a distant 6th or 7th in the AI race. Everyone is too busy playing corporate politics. They need an outsider to come shake things up.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#147

Post by gregorvand »

bix6 wrote: post #7

This is a weird deal? Meta buys a non-controlling stake and says no customers will be affected but the CEO and others are leaving Scale for Meta. Meta also says they won’t have access to competitor data but at 49% ownership they get major investor rights? Sounds like an acqui-kill to me?

Gets around anti competition issues. It’s not an acquisition, it’s just a…

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#148

Post by tgv »

Peroni wrote: post #69
Illniyar wrote: post #39

Matt Levine suggested that this was an aquihire. And the weird setup where they only buy non voting shares is to not trigger any regulatory review

$14.3 Billion seems excessive for it to be a pure aquihire play. There's undoubtedly some IP acquisition (or at least exclusive access to certain IP) involved.

I know "excessive" is technically correct, but at the same time it seems an understatement.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#149

Post by imiric »

laborcontract wrote: post #139
imiric wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Meta is known for anything besides user privacy violations it's for taking risks that often pay off. They were laughed at for overpaying for Instagram and Whatsapp, yet both were instrumental to their current success. Their continued bet on VR is still highly criticized, yet they were the first Big Tech company in the space, they're the current market leaders, and I'm sure it will have huge ROI in the near future.…

I've been all for it, look at my comment elsewhere in this thread. For me this is a huge mistake of a transaction that's neither accretive financially nor talent-wise. This isn't the Instagram or Whatsapp transaction. Scale's been exclusively in the data labeling space. Let's put this into perspective. OpenAI bought Jony Ive for about $5bln. Meta spent 3x that on Wang.

I'm not familiar with Scale, but data labeling can make or break a ML model. So if Scale is good at this, the $14B investment will pay itself off in no time.

Re: Meta invests $14.3B in Scale AI to kick-start superintelligence lab

#150

Post by stingraycharles »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #76
stingraycharles wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but they’ve definitely made a big contribution to AI / LLMs. I just don’t understand how they plan on monetizing upon things, apart from “better AI integration inside their own products”. Are they planning to launch a ChatGPT competitor? It seems like this acquisition is focused on technology, but what’s the product vision?

They already have a chatgpt competitor, you can talk to llama in all the facebook apps, they're just clearly inferior.

Where can I talk to llama in their apps? Serious question.
Post reply on HN