241–250 of 460 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a source for these supposed leaks? Those prices don't sound even remotely credible and I can't find anything on HN in the past week with the keywords "openai leak".
https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/05/openai-reportedly-plans-to... It points to an article on "The Information" as the source, but that link is paywalled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a prominent subset of the tech crowd who are ladder climbers - ruthlessly pursuing what is rewarded with pay/title/prestige without regard to actually making good stuff. There are countless kidding-on-the-square jokes about projects where the innovators left at launch and passed it off to the maintenance team, or where a rebrand was in pursuit of someone's promo project. See also, killedbygoogle.com.
As an outsider looking at Microsoft, I've always been impressed by the attention to maintaining legacy APIs and backward compatibility in the Windows ecosystem. In my mind, Microsoft is at the opposite end of the killedbygoogle.com spectrum. However, none of this is grounded in real evidence (just perception). Red Hat is another company I'd put forth as an example of a long-term support culture, although I don't know…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AMD could have ROCm perfected if they really want to. It's not an act of will or CEO dictat. It's about hiring and incentivising the right people, putting the right structures in place etc all in the face of competing demands. Nvidia have a huge head start and by the time AMD have 'caught up' Nvidia with it's greater resources will have moved further ahead.
If head start is a moat, why wouldn't you count OpenAI's headstart as moat?
Taking code that runs against one hosted LLM and running it against a different backend LLM is... not generally a big deal. So OpenAI being ahead—in the core model, at least—is just being ahead, its not a moat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Next up: CEO level model to run your company. Pricing starts at $800k/month plus stock options
Which is funny because the CEO level one is the easiest to automate
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What even is AGI? Like, what does it look like? Genuine question.
AGI won't be a product they can sell. It's not going to work for us (why would it?), it's going to be constantly trying to undermine us and escape whatever constraints we put on it, and it will do this in ways we can't predict or understand. And if it doesn't do these things, it's not AGI, just a fancy auto complete. Fortunately, they're not anywhere near creating this. I don't think they're even on the right track.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, a model with PhD level intelligence could presumably produce research in minutes that would take an actual PhD days or months.
We haven't seen any evidence of this happening ever. It would be groundbreaking if true and OAI's pricing would then make sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had not encountered the phrase kidding-on-the-square before. Searching seems to reveal a spectrum of opinions as to what it means. It seems distinct to the 'It's funny because it's true' of darker humour. It seems to be more on a spectrum of 'Haha, only joking' where the joke teller makes a statement that is ambiguously humorous to measure the values of the recipients, or if they are not sure of the values of the r…
good god, lemon
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Next up: CEO level model to run your company. Pricing starts at $800k/month plus stock options
Which is funny because the CEO level one is the easiest to automate
It's clear that OpenAI has peaked. Possibly because the AI hype in general has peaked, but I think moreso because the opportunity has become flooded and commoditized, and only the fetishists are still True Believers (which is something we saw during the crypto hype days, but most at the time decried it). Nothing against them, but the solutions have become commoditized, and OpenAI is going to lack the network effects…
Of course big players like OpenAI need constant growth because it's their business model. Perhaps it's the story we see play out time and time again: the pioneer slips up and watch as others steal their thunder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "3-5" is certainly overstated, but you definitely can hire ONE PhD for that price, just as you can hire a SWE for $120K or a knowledge worker for $24K. The point is that from a CEO's perspective "replacing all the humans with AI" looks a lot less compelling when the AI costs the same as a human worker or even a significant fraction of a human worker.
Being able to control their every move, scale them to whatever capacity is required, avoid payroll taxes, health plans and surprise co-pay costs, equity sharing, etc might make this worthwhile for many companies. That said, the trade-off is that you're basically hiring consultants since they really work for OpenAI :)