The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership • Hacker News Board

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#381

Post by HarHarVeryFunny » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 6:36 PM UTC

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? I mean honestly?

I'd say we're still a long way from human level intelligence (can do everything I can do), which is what I think of as AGI, but in this case what matters is how OpenAI and/or their evaluation panel define it.

OpenAI's definition used to be, maybe still is, "able to do most economically valuable tasks", which is so weak and vague they could claim it almost anytime.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#382

Post by array_key_first » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 6:44 PM UTC

czl wrote: post #318

yndoendo wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find there are to main ways to do this. 1) Look for spelling, grammar, and incorrect word usage; such as where vs were, typing out where our should be used. 2) Ask asinine questions that have no answers; _Why does the sun ravel around my finger in low quality gravity while dancing in the rain?_ ML likes to always come up with an answers no matter what. Human will shorten the conversation. It also is programmed to r…

Conventional LLM chatbots behave the way you describe because their goal during training is to as much as possible impersonate an intelligent assistant. Do you think this goal during training cannot be changed to impersonate someone normal such that you cannot detect you are chatting with an LLM? Before flight was understood some thought "magic" was involved. Do you think minds operate using "magic"? Are minds not ma…

Maybe current LLMs can do that. But none are, so it hasn't passed. Whether that's because of economic or marketing reasons as opposed to technical does not matter. You still have to pass the test before we can definitely say you've passed the test.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#383

Post by tguedes » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 6:47 PM UTC

throwup238 wrote: post #301

sekai wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This also confirms the $500 billion valuation making OpenAI the most valuable private startup in the world. SpaceX?

If SpaceX is still a “startup”, the word has lost all meaning.

It already has. Any tech company that is pre-IPO and still raising funding rounds is a "startup". I'm surprised there hasn't been someone to come up with a separate term for the stage of these kinds of companies.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#384

Post by Der_Einzige » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 6:49 PM UTC

whynotminot wrote: post #240

alterom wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It would be possible to be infinitely arbitrary to the point of “AGI” never being reachable by some yard sticks while still performing most viable labor. "Most viable labor" involves getting things from one place to another, and that's not even the hard part of it. In any case, any sane definition of general AI would entail things that people can generally do. Like driving. >That is stupid That's just, like, your op…

I had a friend who had his Tesla drive him from his driveway in another city 3+ hrs away to my driveway with no intervention. I feel like everyone’s opinion on how self-driving is going is still rooted in 2018 or something and no one has updated.

Rest assured, your friends driving was the same quality as the average drunk grandma on the road if they were exclusively using Tesla's "FSD" with no intervention for hours. It drives so piss poorly that I have to frequently intervene even on the latest beta software. If I lived in a shoot happy state like Texas I'm sure that a road rager would have put a bullet hole somewhere in my Tesla by now if I kept driving like that.

There's a difference between "I survived" and "I drive anywhere close to the quality of the average American" - a low bar and one that still is not met by Tesla FSD.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#385

Post by CoastalCoder » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 6:49 PM UTC

waffletower wrote: post #274

htrp wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FSD would like a word

As a full stack developer suffering from female sexual dysfunction who owns a Tesla, I am really confused about what you are trying to say.

Have you tried praying to the Flying Spaghetti Deity?

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#386

Post by Vinnl » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 6:57 PM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #363

Vinnl wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the Turing Test has been passed. The test was setup such that the interrogator knew that one of the two participants was a bot, and was trying to find out which. As far as I know, it's still relatively easy to find out you're talking to an LLM if you're actively looking for it.

As far as I know, it's still relatively easy to find out you're talking to an LLM if you're actively looking for it. People are being fooled in online forums all the time. That includes people who are naturally suspicious of online bullshittery. I'm sure I have been. Stick a fork in the Turing test, it's done. The amount of goalpost-moving and hand-waving that's necessary to argue otherwise simply isn't worthwhile. T…

I feel like you're skipping over the "if you're actively looking for it" bit. You can call it goalpost-moving, or you can check the original paper by Turing and see that this is exactly how he defined it in the first place.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#387

Post by drusepth » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 7:03 PM UTC

It seems really weird to me that such granular intercorporate details are made publicly available (in a blog post?). I've never had to publicly state things like this when making corporate partnerships. That makes me wonder how much of this post is crafted solely for PR...

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#388

Post by saaaaaam » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 7:15 PM UTC

yousif_123123 wrote: post #284

saaaaaam wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the company valued at $500 billion or is the sum of the digital assets they’ve collateralised worth $500 billion? Because if you buy the tokens you presumably do not own the company. And if you buy the company you hopefully don’t own the tokens - nor the assets that back the tokens.

I think I read that its valued at 500 billion based on their latest fund raise. I don't know the total holdings they have. I have no interest in crypto, just wanted to mention this which was surprising to me when I heard it.

For comparison Blackstone is worth ~$180bn with ~$1 trillion AUM.

So somehow this crypto firm and its investor think it can get a better return than Blackstone with a fraction of the assets. Now, sure, developing market and all that. But really? If it scaled to Blackstone assets level of $1 trillion then you’d expect the platform valuation to scale, perhaps not in lockstep but at least somewhat. So with $1 trillion in collateralised crypto does that make Tether worth $1.5 trillion? I’d love someone to explain that.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#389

Post by travelalberta » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 7:21 PM UTC

armonster wrote: post #159

crazygringo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people didn't think we were anywhere close to LLM's five years ago. The capabilities we have now were expected to be a decades away, depending on who you talked to. [EDIT: sorry, I should have said 10 years ago... recent years get too compressed in my head and stuff from 2020 still feels like it was 2 years ago!] So I think a lot of people now don't see what the path is to AGI, but also realize they hadn't seen…

I think what is much more plausible is that companies such as this one benefit greatly from being viewed as being close to, or on the way to AGI.

> Once AGI is declared by OpenAI, that declaration will now be verified by an independent expert panel.

I always like the phrase, "follow the money", in situations like this. Are OpenAI or Microsoft close to AGI? Who knows... Is there a monetary incentive to making you believe they are close to AGI? Absolutely. Take in this was the first bullet point in Microsoft's blog post.

Re: The next chapter of the Microsoft–OpenAI partnership

#390

Post by chasd00 » Tue, Oct 28, 2025, 7:27 PM UTC

IlikeKitties wrote: post #200

forgotoldacc wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're about as smart as a person who's kind of decent at every field. If you're a pro, it's pretty clear when it's BSing. But if you're not, the answers are often close enough. And just like humans, they can be very confidently wrong. When any person tells us something, we assume there's some degree of imperfection in their statements. If a nurse at a hospital tells you the doctor's office is 3 doors down on the ri…

> They're about as smart as a person who's kind of decent at every field. If you're a pro, it's pretty clear when it's BSing. But if you're not, the answers are often close enough. No they are not smart at all. Not even a little. They cannot reason about anything except that their training data overwhelmingly agrees or disagrees with their output nor can they learn and adept. They are just text compression and rearra…

Something about an LLM response has a major impact on some people. Last weekend I was in in Ft. Lauderdale FL with a friend who's pretty sharp ( licensed architect, decades long successful career etc) and went to the horse track. I've never been to a horse race and didn't understand the betting so I took a snapshot of the race program, gave it to chatGPT and asked it to devise a low risk set of bets using $100. It came back with what you'd expect, a detailed, very confident answer. My friend was completely taken with it and insisted on following it to the letter. After the race he turned his $100 into $28 and was dumbfounded. I told him "it can't tell the future, what were you expecting?". Something about getting the answer from a computer or the level of detail had him convinced it was a sure thing. I donm't understand it but LLMs have a profound effect on some people.

edit: i'm very thankful my friend didn't end up winning more than he bet. idk what he would have done if his feelings towards the LLM was confirmed by adding money to his pocket..