181–190 of 244 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The users won't know if you used Foundation Models API or integrated with OpenAI/Anthropic/Gemini SDK directly. That's the point! That's the whole "white-labeling" part, and what the commentator earlier is talking about. You're very close in understanding the context here!
I’m sorry, so your position now is that “being completely invisible to the users” is “controlling the UX”?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt that. What stops the Chinese labs from figuring it out? It’s not like these models are fundamentally different from each other
If all you have is the starting point and the finishing point, the lack of the path taken from one point to another limits your ability to train models that can efficiently recreate the work, and increases its cost enough that it's possible the US labs can progress capabilities faster than Chinese labs can distill that behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Benedict Evans may be right after all; frontier models look more and more like telecom companies in the 90s. Billions and billions of investment in infrastructure while others further up the stack captured all the value.
In spite of their deeper pockets, massive datacenters, colosal amounts of user data, and hundreds of thousands of top developers, even Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google are well behind. I think Evans is completely wrong. There are only 2 truly frontier models. (at least for now). And Anthropic seems to be leaving OpenAI behind so there might be only 1 in the near future. (which is scary/dangerous)
Some of the harness even let you run a local model for most things, and only pay for the latest frontier models when needed, which cuts down cost drastically.
This is Apple commoditizing LLMs while keeping control of the UX. They are a hardware company and will keep selling the best machine for AI use. Well done.
Now we only need to commoditize the hardware.
Android succeeded at this to an extent with phones, but Apple has been able to keep its products differentiated enough in the minds of consumers to maintain their premium pricing. So far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt that. What stops the Chinese labs from figuring it out? It’s not like these models are fundamentally different from each other
If all you have is the starting point and the finishing point, the lack of the path taken from one point to another limits your ability to train models that can efficiently recreate the work, and increases its cost enough that it's possible the US labs can progress capabilities faster than Chinese labs can distill that behavior.
Isn’t this the problem inference (training) a model is designed to solve :)))
How can you practically use this in software if you're to deploy this to users? Asking a user to create and enter their own API key is a bar too high for good UX.
Ugh. It really is. I have allihat.com which is the only safari extension (i think still) that talks to claude. And it's well sought for. But you as a user have to enter a friggin claude api key. :( And I still don't grok their TOS around this. Like you can still type: ```setup-token Set up a long-lived authentication token (requires Claude subscription)``` but this seems like a trap? :) Whose using this? Doesn't this…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Benedict Evans may be right after all; frontier models look more and more like telecom companies in the 90s. Billions and billions of investment in infrastructure while others further up the stack captured all the value.
Last I checked the telcos made plenty of money in the 90s. Should Verizon be getting a cut of my Claude Pro subscription, since I use FIOS to access it?
The fact that telcos couldn't charge rent was a primary reason the Internet was so successful.
Remember $0.10 per text message? You bet in some alternate timeline AT&T charges $0.10 per webpage visit and we're stuck on 100kbps connections because the monopoly doesn't want to innovate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In spite of their deeper pockets, massive datacenters, colosal amounts of user data, and hundreds of thousands of top developers, even Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google are well behind. I think Evans is completely wrong. There are only 2 truly frontier models. (at least for now). And Anthropic seems to be leaving OpenAI behind so there might be only 1 in the near future. (which is scary/dangerous)
>I think Evans is completely wrong. I wish there was a case where I find Evans is wrong. As far as my memory served me, I failed to record a single one. I disagree that Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google are " well " behind. If anything the frontier model advantage seems to be at best 6 - 9 months. And that the Chinese model are all doing well. One of Steve Jobs's line, "It is a feature, not a product." Even if Appl…
Do you mean Google's AI with Apple wrappers? Apple's in-house AI is further behind Google, amd very far from the frontier according to your ranking. IMO, Google is on the frontier - I recall Altman calling for an OpenAI all-hands-on deck when Gemini was released because of how good it was compared to ChatGPT. I also suspect Google has the lowest operating expenses due to scale, experience and luck/planning (TPUs), there will come a time when AI investments will slow down, and the cost of revenue will become more important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now we only need to commoditize the hardware.
This is what originally made Microsoft the most lucrative tech company of its day. Android succeeded at this to an extent with phones, but Apple has been able to keep its products differentiated enough in the minds of consumers to maintain their premium pricing. So far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Benedict Evans may be right after all; frontier models look more and more like telecom companies in the 90s. Billions and billions of investment in infrastructure while others further up the stack captured all the value.
There will be frontier models that are non-commoditized, but they'll be kept guarded and hidden away, and you'll only get the final result, so that they can't be distilled and their harness can't be reverse engineered. They'll be billed like employees, rather than like a tool.