321–330 of 777 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI feels like a solution looking for a problem. The problem is increasing profits by replacing paid labor with something "good enough".
Doesn't sound like a very profitable problem to solve. At least, not in the long term (which no one orchestrating this is thinking in).
It’s like watching a train wreck waiting to happen, while everyone praise the madman conduct or who’s operating the locomotor at full steam.
Is it necessary to a point you want to make?
You can just point to behavior of a given entity, such as to conclude it's untrustworthy, without the problematic area of armchair psychoanalysis.
AI is going to be a highly-competitive, extremely capital-intensive commodity market that ends up in a race to the bottom competing on cost and efficiency of delivering models that have all reached the same asymptotic performance in the sense of intelligence, reasoning, etc. The simple evidence for this is that everyone who has invested the same resources in AI has produced roughly the same result. OpenAI, Anthropic,…
Google’s moat: Try “@gmail” in Gemini Google’s surface area to apply AI is larger than any other company’s. And they have arguably the best multimodal model and indisputably the best flash model?
The fact is nobody has any idea what OpenAI's cash burn is. Measuring how much they're raising is not an adequate proxy. For all we know, they could be accumulating capital to weather an AI winter. It's also worth noting that OpenAI has not trained a new model since gpt4o (all subsequent models are routing systems and prompt chains built on top of 4), so the idea of OpenAI being stuck in some kind of runaway training…
> The fact is nobody has any idea what OpenAI's cash burn is. Their investors surely do (absent outrageous fraud). > For all we know, they could be accumulating capital to weather an AI winter. If they were, their investors would be freaking out (or complicit in the resulting fraud). This seems unlikely. In point of fact it seems like they're playing commodities market-cornering games[1] with their excess cash, which…
Right, this is nonsense. Even if investors wanted to be complicit in fraud, it's an insane investment. "Give us money so we can survive the AI winter" is a pitch you might try with the government, but a profit-motivated investor will... probably not actually laugh in your face, but tell you they'll call you and laugh about you later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it is in every business’s best interest to charge the maximum…
Utilities and insurance companies are two examples of business regulated to not charge the maximum, for public policy reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google has several enviable, if not moats, at least redoubts. TPUs, mass infrastructure and own their own cloud services, they own delivery mechanisms on mobile (Android) and every device (Chrome). And Google and Youtube are still #1 and #2 most visited websites in the world.
Not to mention security. I'd trust Google more not to have a data breach than open AI / whomever. Email accounts are hugely valuable but I haven't seen a Google data breach in the 20+ years I've been using them. This matters because I don't want my chats out there in public. Also integration with other services. I just had Gemini summarize the contents of a Google Drive folder and it was effortless & effective
The NSA and GHCQ and basically every TLA with the ability to tap a fibre cable had figured out the gap in Google’s armour: Google’s datacenter backhaul links were unencrypted. Tap into them, and you get _everything_.
I’ve no idea whether Snowdon’s leaks were a revelation or a confirmation for google themselves; either way, it’s arguably a total breach.
The fact is nobody has any idea what OpenAI's cash burn is. Measuring how much they're raising is not an adequate proxy. For all we know, they could be accumulating capital to weather an AI winter. It's also worth noting that OpenAI has not trained a new model since gpt4o (all subsequent models are routing systems and prompt chains built on top of 4), so the idea of OpenAI being stuck in some kind of runaway training…
AI is going to be a highly-competitive, extremely capital-intensive commodity market that ends up in a race to the bottom competing on cost and efficiency of delivering models that have all reached the same asymptotic performance in the sense of intelligence, reasoning, etc. The simple evidence for this is that everyone who has invested the same resources in AI has produced roughly the same result. OpenAI, Anthropic,…
There is a pretty big moat for Google: extreme amounts of video data on their existing services and absolutely no dependence on Nvidia and it's 90% margin.
Google suffers from classic Innovator's Dilemma and need competition to refocus on what ought to be basic survival instincts. What is worse is the search users are not the customers. The customers of Google Search are the advertisers and they will always prioritise the needs of the customers and squander their moats as soon as the threat is gone.
It’s like watching a train wreck waiting to happen, while everyone praise the madman conduct or who’s operating the locomotor at full steam.
I don't think that's diagnosis (as a clinical term); closer to defamation. Is it necessary to a point you want to make? You can just point to behavior of a given entity, such as to conclude it's untrustworthy, without the problematic area of armchair psychoanalysis.