271–280 of 280 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It also needs to be differentiated from ASI with godlike powers many times greater than human. Wasn't there a thread the other day about how very few humans on earth can understand the new math proofs? Although "with sufficient study" vs "not even with unlimited study" are probably worth distinguishing there.
> Wasn't there a thread the other day about how very few humans on earth can understand the new math proofs? Do you perhaps have a link to it? Tried to search around but couldn’t find it. Would love to read it
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49165570
> When OpenAI posted about their 10 breakthroughs, I saw lots of career research mathematicians say things mostly along the lines of “I don’t understand any of this it’s way over my head”.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49182779
> They're publishing machine checkable proofs because that's the only way they, themselves, can check them.
> They don't understand the math either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I fail to see how you can make it work when doing LLM inference which is significantly costlier than web search. The median LLM query isn't significantly costlier than web search.
I don't know where you get that from, but it's pretty easy to prove it wrong: with their daily active users count, OpenAI and Anthropic would have been profitable for years if that was true. Instead they are bleeding cash like no others and are still trying to secure another round of funding 4 years after becoming among the most heavily used apps in existence. Whatever you think about Altman and Amodei, they aren't c…
No they wouldn't have. Low cost isn't no cost, R$D is expensive and there are a class of tokenmaxxing users well outside the median (e.g Agentic Coding).
> I don't know where you get that from
https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/infrastructure/measur...
https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy-does-chatg...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the stuff I use is free and excellent. Linux, Firefox, libreoffice, xcp-ng, bottles, steam, playnite, opnsense, docker, dockhand, immich, freshrss, obsidian, tailscale, calibre, caddy, docker, pi-hole, signal, audiobookshelf I could probably keep going for a long while. I'm very glad most good software creators I've come across do not have your mindset.
None of these things are free my friend. They probably represent tens of billions of dollars in development over years, decades in some cases. You are missing the point entirely. Let's just take one: LibreOffice. This was a FOSS project from the very start. It is intended to be used as you use it. Even then, bitching about functionality and features would be entitled. In that case, if you don't like it, stop using it…
I have not paid a single cent for any of them. Many of them I'm even free to change it however I like and even release my version as a fork.
>Even then, bitching about functionality and features would be entitled.
If you think Linux or ANY of the software I listed would be nearly as good without users "bitching" I have several bridges to sell you. The alternative is to pay a whole bunch of people to test every aspect of the software to find bugs, missing features, minor UI quirks that could be tightened, etc. FOSS only works because of us "entitled" people writing git issues or contributing code when we know how to fix the issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know where you get that from, but it's pretty easy to prove it wrong: with their daily active users count, OpenAI and Anthropic would have been profitable for years if that was true. Instead they are bleeding cash like no others and are still trying to secure another round of funding 4 years after becoming among the most heavily used apps in existence. Whatever you think about Altman and Amodei, they aren't c…
>with their daily active users count, OpenAI and Anthropic would have been profitable for years if that was true. No they wouldn't have. Low cost isn't no cost, R$D is expensive and there are a class of tokenmaxxing users well outside the median (e.g Agentic Coding). > I don't know where you get that from https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/infrastructure/measur... https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy…
I'm not talking about R&D.
> there are a class of tokenmaxxing users well outside the median (e.g Agentic Coding).
It wasn't a thing before last year and OpenAI wasn't making profit before that either.
> https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/infrastructure/measur...
> https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy-does-chatg...
None of these support your claim.
Again, when you're here saying that the CEOs of the two biggest AI companies are basically idiots, nobody will take you seriously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>with their daily active users count, OpenAI and Anthropic would have been profitable for years if that was true. No they wouldn't have. Low cost isn't no cost, R$D is expensive and there are a class of tokenmaxxing users well outside the median (e.g Agentic Coding). > I don't know where you get that from https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/infrastructure/measur... https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy…
> No they wouldn't have. Low cost isn't no cost, R$D is expensive I'm not talking about R&D. > there are a class of tokenmaxxing users well outside the median (e.g Agentic Coding). It wasn't a thing before last year and OpenAI wasn't making profit before that either. > https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/infrastructure/measur ... > https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy-does-chatg ... None of these supp…
You said OpenAI and Anthropic would be profitable if the median query was as cheap as I say. I'm telling they wouldn't be because inference isn't the only cost these companies shoulder. R&D/Training is a very big part of costs. That you didn't mention it is irrelevant. R&D is the lion's share of costs - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48550465
>None of these support your claim.
Yeah they do lol. Both those articles place the median query cost around the same as a Google search.
>Again, when you're here saying that the CEOs of the two biggest AI companies are basically idiots, nobody will take you seriously.
That's not what I'm saying and I don't see what's so hard to understand here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm getting all my questions (3-10 each evening) answered by "Gemini Pro Extended" in the free tier, sometimes with PDFs or photos attached. I wouldn't bother with anything "free" below that, unless I'm agentic coding or something.
Are you certain they are the correct answers? No other AI tool halucinations so confidently for me as does Gemini. And I get them across so many topics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a problem Google has to solve too ;-) To expand: it seems inevitable that Google's SERP format will be replaced with a conversational / chatbot / agentic interface, which equalizes the playing field for all chatbot providers. This is because you can stuff in much fewer ads into a chat interface compared to SERPs. (They could try stuffing more ads but that would likely just push users more to the competition wh…
Google has multiple massive cost advantages over OAI: TPUs, free access to massively valuable data (search index, gmail, maps reviews/PO/ navigation, youtube, android etc.), lower talent costs, lower training costs, lower distribution costs (they can shove AI down our throats in so many different places), lower ad infrastructure costs (it will be a lot of work for OAI to recreate adwords), lower ad sales costs (OAI d…
Then notice how many of the advantages you enumerated are directly related to their ad business. But the ad business itself is under threat. I just cannot see how they can stuff as many ads in an agentic interface as their SERPs. E.g. what's the net outcome of shoving AI everywhere if it's not going to be monetized nearly as well as their ads?
My point is, Google has finetuned their ad business and surrounding ecosystem to an extreme level to sustain this absolute firehose of cash (including antitrust and rig-bidding shenanigans they were literally found guilty of) but almost all of that is disrupted by the shift to chat interfaces.
I think Google will do extremely well as an AI chatbot / agent and cloud AI provider, but it will not be nearly as lucrative as the ad business they have to cannibalize to get there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a problem Google has to solve too ;-) To expand: it seems inevitable that Google's SERP format will be replaced with a conversational / chatbot / agentic interface, which equalizes the playing field for all chatbot providers. This is because you can stuff in much fewer ads into a chat interface compared to SERPs. (They could try stuffing more ads but that would likely just push users more to the competition wh…
Have you used the Google search engine in the past couple years? You’re painting a dichotomy that doesn’t exist and hasn’t for a good while. Edit: I missed your final paragraph. I still disagree with this argument though, people still want to go to websites.
https://www.niemanlab.org/2026/07/search-traffic-has-decline...
https://www.techspot.com/news/113199-reddit-major-publishers...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wasn't there a thread the other day about how very few humans on earth can understand the new math proofs? Do you perhaps have a link to it? Tried to search around but couldn’t find it. Would love to read it
> "Already, there are very few mathematicians qualified to verify OpenAI’s new results. As progress continues, that number will approach zero." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49165570 > When OpenAI posted about their 10 breakthroughs, I saw lots of career research mathematicians say things mostly along the lines of “I don’t understand any of this it’s way over my head”. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4918…