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

The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 496 posts

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#331

Post by torginus »

alain94040 wrote: post #188
philipwhiuk wrote: post #79

> Once AGI is declared by OpenAI, that declaration will now be verified by an independent expert panel. > Microsoft’s IP rights for both models and products are extended through 2032 and now includes models post-AGI, with appropriate safety guardrails. Does anyone really think we are close to AGI? I mean honestly?

> Does anyone really think we are close to AGI? My definition of AGI is when AI doesn't need humans anymore to create new models (to be specific, models that continue the GPT3 -> GPT4 -> GPT5 trend). By my definition, once that happens, I don't really see a role for Microsoft to play. So not sure what value their legal deal has. I don't think we're there at all anyway.

> I don't really see a role for Microsoft to play.

They have money and infra, if AI can create better AI models, then isn't OpenAI with its researches going to be the redundant one?

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#332

Post by oldestofsports »

philipwhiuk wrote: post #79

> Once AGI is declared by OpenAI, that declaration will now be verified by an independent expert panel. > Microsoft’s IP rights for both models and products are extended through 2032 and now includes models post-AGI, with appropriate safety guardrails. Does anyone really think we are close to AGI? I mean honestly?

We will achieve AGI when they decide it is AGI (I dont believe for a second this independent expert panel wont be biased). And it won’t matter if you call their bluff, because the world doesnt give a shit about truth anymore.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#333

Post by Zababa »

wrsh07 wrote: post #207
philipwhiuk wrote: post #79

> Once AGI is declared by OpenAI, that declaration will now be verified by an independent expert panel. > Microsoft’s IP rights for both models and products are extended through 2032 and now includes models post-AGI, with appropriate safety guardrails. Does anyone really think we are close to AGI? I mean honestly?

Yes. Some ai skeptical people (eg Tyler Cowen, who does not think AI will have a significant economic impact) think gpt5 is AGI. It was news when dwarkesh interviewed Karpathy who said per his definition of AGI, he doesn't think it will occur until 2035. Thus, if karpathy is pessimistic, then many people working in AI today think we will have agi by 2032 (and likely sooner, eg end of 2028)

Btw the definition Karpathy gave was:

> a system you could go to that can do any economically valuable task at human performance or better.

https://open.substack.com/pub/dwarkesh/p/andrej-karpathy?sel...

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#334

Post by tempodox »

no_wizard wrote: post #96
philipwhiuk wrote: post #79

> Once AGI is declared by OpenAI, that declaration will now be verified by an independent expert panel. > Microsoft’s IP rights for both models and products are extended through 2032 and now includes models post-AGI, with appropriate safety guardrails. Does anyone really think we are close to AGI? I mean honestly?

They’ll devalue the term into something that makes it so. The common conception of it however, no I don’t believe we are anywhere close to it. It’s no different than how they moved the goalpost on the definition of AI at the start of this boom cycle

> They’ll devalue the term

Exactly. As soon as the money runs out, “AGI” will be whatever they’ve got by then.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#335

Post by torginus »

k9294 wrote: post #232
danans wrote: post #97

> Once AGI is declared by OpenAI ... I think it's funny and telling that they've used the word "declare" where what they are really doing is "claim". These guys think they are prophets.

They have a definition actually) “When AI generates $100 billion in profits” it will be considered an AGI. This term was defined in their previous partnership, not sure if it's still holds after the restructuring. https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/26/microsoft-and-openai-have-...

That is a staggering number - if an engineer makes $100k per year, and let's say OpenAI can do a 20% profit margin on running an engineer-equivalent agent, that means it needs $600B profit or 6 million fully-equivalent engineer years.

I think you can rebuild human civilization with that.

I feel like replacing highly skilled human labor hardly makes financial sense, if it costs that much.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#336

Post by parliament32 »

respondo2134 wrote: post #26
anonymous908213 wrote: post #8

> AGI AGI AGI AGI AGI AGI AGI AGI AGI Spare me. Sam has been talking about ChatGPT already being AGI for ages, meanwhile still peddling this duplicitous talk about how AGI is coming despite it apparently already being here. Can we act like grownups and treat this like a normal tool? No, no we cannot, for Sam is a hype merchant.

it's notable that there is no talk about defining what exactly AGI is - or even spelling out the three letter acronym - because that doesn't serve his narative. He wants the general public to equate human intelligence with current OpenAI, not ask what does this mean or how would we know. He's selling another type of hammer that's proving useful in some situations but presenting it as the last universal tool anyone wi…

AGI is pretty clearly defined here: https://openai.com/charter/

> OpenAI’s mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI)—by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work—benefits all of humanity.

So, can you (and everyone you know) be replaced at work by a subscription yet? If not, it's not AGI I guess.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#337

Post by daveguy »

torginus wrote: post #328
wrsh07 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Some ai skeptical people (eg Tyler Cowen, who does not think AI will have a significant economic impact) think gpt5 is AGI. It was news when dwarkesh interviewed Karpathy who said per his definition of AGI, he doesn't think it will occur until 2035. Thus, if karpathy is pessimistic, then many people working in AI today think we will have agi by 2032 (and likely sooner, eg end of 2028)

Depends on how you define AGI - if you define it as an AI that can learn to perform generalist tasks - then yes, transformers like GPT 5 (or 3) are AGI as the same model can be trained to do every task and it will perform reasonably well. But I guess what most people would consider AGI would be something capable of on-line learning and self improvement. I don't get the 2035 prediction though (or any other prediction…

> I think with ARC-AGI 2 this was the kind of compute budget they spent to get their models to perform on a human-ish level.

It was ARC-AGI-1 that they used extreme computing budgets to get to human-ish level performance. With ARC-AGI-2 they haven't gotten past ~30% correct. The average human performance is ~65% for ARC-AGI-2, and a human panel gets 100% (because humans understand logical arguments rather than simply exclaiming "you're absolutely right!").

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#338

Post by oldestofsports »

nl wrote: post #178
no_wizard wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’ll devalue the term into something that makes it so. The common conception of it however, no I don’t believe we are anywhere close to it. It’s no different than how they moved the goalpost on the definition of AI at the start of this boom cycle

> they moved the goalpost on the definition of AI at the start of this boom cycle Who is this "they" you speak of? It's true the definition has changed, but not in the direction you seem to think. Before this boom cycle the standard for "AI" was the Turing test. There is no doubt we have comprehensively passed that now.

Oh there us much doubt about whether LLMs surpass the turing test. It does so only in certain variations

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#339

Post by slashdave »

gehwartzen wrote: post #156
no_wizard wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’ll devalue the term into something that makes it so. The common conception of it however, no I don’t believe we are anywhere close to it. It’s no different than how they moved the goalpost on the definition of AI at the start of this boom cycle

This is exactly why they will have an “expert panel” to make that determination. They wouldn’t make something up

Making things up is exactly what expert panels are good at doing

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#340

Post by slashdave »

ramses0 wrote: post #126
no_wizard wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’ll devalue the term into something that makes it so. The common conception of it however, no I don’t believe we are anywhere close to it. It’s no different than how they moved the goalpost on the definition of AI at the start of this boom cycle

Jesus, we've gone from Eliza and Bayes Spam Filters to being able to hold an "intelligent" conversation with a bot that can write code like: "make me a sandwich" => "ok, making sandwich.py, adding test, keeping track of a todo list, validating tests, etc..." We might not _quite_ be at the era of "I'm sorry I can't let you do that Dave...", but on the spectrum, and from the perspective of a lay-person, we're waaaaay c…

So, where is my sandwich? I am hungry
Post reply on HN