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

Google's True Moonshot

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 127 posts

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#41

Post by danielovichdk »

terryf wrote: post #34

Is it possible that google will build the next great AI? Of course. But right now they really really seem to be failing at it. Maybe the core tech in gemini is great. But it's nowhere. Just as an anecdote, I tried to actually pay google for an AI product they claimed to have launched - the image generation, Imagen 2. And apparently, I can't. Even after tens of e-mails and a call with an account manager, the response…

I would love to know if this really is Conways Law exposing poor reaction and innovation reactions.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#42

Post by huytersd »

riku_iki wrote: post #12
geodel wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It needs to be at least many hundred million disagree to matter.

> hundred million this is about how many people now going to ChatGPT while were going to Google year ago for similar searches

At least in my experience, ChatGPT uses Bing a whole lot. I wonder what the stats for Bing usage are now compared to Google since ChatGPT has been out for a while.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#43

Post by willvarfar »

carlineng wrote: post #15
fumar wrote: post #13

The lengthy post boils down to this quote " Google could build the AI to win it all" but it is not guaranteed. I appreciate the context as someone who hasn't kept a close eye on Google's AI efforts, but Ben doesn't cover why Google has a right to win outside of search data. Interestingly, there is no mention of AWS and Amazon's wider efforts to create AI tools. There is hype around chat bots but what is the likelihoo…

The argument is more than that -- namely that in addition to having sophisticated AI, Google also controls the OS (Android) and hardware (Pixel). Being able to integrate best-in-class AI at every level of the stack is a tremendous advantage. OpenAI can't do this because they don't control the OS, and will always need to go through an app. Apple can play since they control OS and hardware, but at the moment they appea…

I'm expecting:

* Microsoft to do it for business users

* Google pixie does it first for personal use. Android phones might even momentarily be more desirable than iphone

* Apple eventually get there, for their walled garden

* Amazon etc fall totally behind

* And, years later, users of google docs are still waiting for basic AI help writing docs whilst google completely doesn't try in that space

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#44

Post by [deleted] »

cortesoft wrote: post #30
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #21

The one part of this thesis that I pretty strongly disagree with is the idea that people would prefer to have long, meandering voice conversations with an AI, compared to text. Just look at anyone under the age of 25 (35 maybe?) They can easily have long, meandering conversations with actual humans using voice, yet I see them go for text 9 times out of ten. As someone on the backside of middle age, I often find it pr…

> At least for me, typing frees up my brain to actually move faster. When typing, I can think about the next phrase or sentence. When talking, I find it much more difficult to "think ahead", so to speak. I wonder if this would change as we got more familiar with interacting with a voice AI. I think a lot of the extra brain power that goes into talking versus typing is the assumed need to keep talking at a constant pa…

[deleted]

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#45

Post by transitus »

noitpmeder wrote: post #32
ChrisArchitect wrote: post #26

Aside: excruciating one hundred paragraphs about stuff he said previously, recently, or in another lifetime, before getting to the actual topic and title subject of the article. Geez. I don't need articles to be transcripts of podcast-esque rambling. Get on with it!

This is a very common pattern (and criticism) of stratechery.

This pattern of writing isn't necessarily a criticism; it can also be beneficial. Visit infrequently (thus saving time to use for other worthwhile activities), and you'll receive a summary of his thoughts over a decade, all in a well-organized and smoothly flowing text. Additionally, if you prefer to skip the historical recap and setting, you can simply start reading from the end.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#46

Post by h4vot »

noitpmeder wrote: post #32
ChrisArchitect wrote: post #26

Aside: excruciating one hundred paragraphs about stuff he said previously, recently, or in another lifetime, before getting to the actual topic and title subject of the article. Geez. I don't need articles to be transcripts of podcast-esque rambling. Get on with it!

This is a very common pattern (and criticism) of stratechery.

I've allways found it valid and helpful background

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#47

Post by spzb »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #21

The one part of this thesis that I pretty strongly disagree with is the idea that people would prefer to have long, meandering voice conversations with an AI, compared to text. Just look at anyone under the age of 25 (35 maybe?) They can easily have long, meandering conversations with actual humans using voice, yet I see them go for text 9 times out of ten. As someone on the backside of middle age, I often find it pr…

Typing also has the advantage that several people doing it in the same room at the same time don’t interfere with each other. A train carriage full of people texting is considerably less annoying than the same carriage full of people chattering away with their voice assistants

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#48

Post by qp11 »

terryf wrote: post #34

Is it possible that google will build the next great AI? Of course. But right now they really really seem to be failing at it. Maybe the core tech in gemini is great. But it's nowhere. Just as an anecdote, I tried to actually pay google for an AI product they claimed to have launched - the image generation, Imagen 2. And apparently, I can't. Even after tens of e-mails and a call with an account manager, the response…

Microsoft isn't any better. Competition in this space is dead. Who ever is capable of posing a threat to both these obese rentier parasites will be targeted and obliterated given the cash mountain ranges at their disposal. Quality is not possible when competition is an illusion.

Re: Google's True Moonshot

#49

Post by wayfinder »

lmm wrote: post #40
carlineng wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is more than that -- namely that in addition to having sophisticated AI, Google also controls the OS (Android) and hardware (Pixel). Being able to integrate best-in-class AI at every level of the stack is a tremendous advantage. OpenAI can't do this because they don't control the OS, and will always need to go through an app. Apple can play since they control OS and hardware, but at the moment they appea…

OpenAI has close ties to Microsoft and we've already seen them integrate AI into Bing; MS may not be a player in phones but they make a major OS and some of the best hardware money can buy. I'm really not convinced vertical integration matters all that much, but if it does, they can do it.

Unsurprisingly, they already integrated OpenAI into Windows. You can ask it questions and pass it files.
Post reply on HN