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

Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 915 posts

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#311

Post by pron »

jmward01 wrote: post #271
delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI. If you gave me CC in the 80's I would probably have called it 'alive' since it clearly passes the Turing test as I understood it then (I wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from a person for most conversations). Now every time it gets better we push that definition further and every crack we open to a chasm and declare that it isn't close. At the same time there ar…

The Turing test pits a human against a machine, each trying to convince a human questioner that the other is the machine. If the machine knows how humans generally behave, for a proper test, the human contestant should know how the machine behaves. I think that this YouTube channel clearly shows that none of today's models pass the Turing test: https://www.youtube.com/@FatherPhi

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#312

Post by johnfn »

delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

It’s insane to me how yesterday someone posted an example of ChatGPT Pro one-shotting an Erdos problem after 90 minutes of thinking and today you’re saying that AGI is a fairy tale.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#313

Post by ozgrakkurt »

delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

but, is the world ready for your win? I'm very afraid your win might shake the world too much! THINK ABOUT IT!

I think this might be similar to how we changed to cars when we were using horses

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#315

Post by lesuorac »

jmward01 wrote: post #271
delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI. If you gave me CC in the 80's I would probably have called it 'alive' since it clearly passes the Turing test as I understood it then (I wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from a person for most conversations). Now every time it gets better we push that definition further and every crack we open to a chasm and declare that it isn't close. At the same time there ar…

> Maybe we need to start thinking less about building tests for definitively calling an LLM AGI and instead deciding when we can't tell humans aren't LLMs for declaring AGI is here.

If you've never read the original paper [1] I recommend that you do so. We're long past the point of some human can't determine if X was done by man or machine.

[1]: https://courses.cs.umbc.edu/471/papers/turing.pdf

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#316

Post by measurablefunc »

johnfn wrote: post #312
delis-thumbs-7e wrote: post #30

It’s insane how they talk about AGI, like it was some scientifically qualifiable thing that is certain to happen any time now. When I have become the javelin Olympic Champion, I will buy a vegan ice cream to everyone with a HN account.

It’s insane to me how yesterday someone posted an example of ChatGPT Pro one-shotting an Erdos problem after 90 minutes of thinking and today you’re saying that AGI is a fairy tale.

It's not one-shot. Other people had attempted the same problem w/ the same AI & failed. You're confused about terms so you redefine them to make your version of the fairy tale real.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#317

Post by echelon »

smcg wrote: post #297
breezybottom wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the advancement in AI over the last four years has greatly exceeded the advancement in understanding the workings of human intelligence. What paradigm shift has there been recently in that field?

What have we learned that isn't in my textbook from the 90s?

> What have we learned that isn't in my textbook from the 90s?

Does it matter?

We can do countless things people in the 90's would think was black magic.

If I showed the kid version of myself what I can do with Opus or Nano Banana or Seedance, let alone broadband and smartphones, I think I'd feel we were living in the Star Trek future. The fact that we can have "conversations" with AI is wild. That we can make movies and websites and games. It's incredible.

And there does not seem to be a limit yet.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#318

Post by lesuorac »

snek_case wrote: post #248
nacozarina wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One (1) year after M$ bought Nokia they wrote it off for $7.6 Billion. There’s no upper limit to their financial stupidity.

The metaverse is another example if anyone doubts the bounds of corporate stupidity.

Why?

FaceBook largely requires an Apple iPhone, Apple computer, "Microsoft" computer, "Google" phone, or a "Google" computer to use it. At any point one of those companies could cut FaceBook off (ex. [1]).

The Metaverse was a long term goal to get people onto a device (Occulus) that Meta controlled. While I think an AR device is much more useful than VR; I'm not convinced that it's a mistake for Meta to peruse not being beholden to other platforms.

[1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/facebook-and-google-...

Post reply on HN