Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

bloomberg.com

401–410 of 622 posts

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#401

Not sure if related or not, Sam Altman, ~12hrs ago: there is no wall [1] [1] https://x.com/sama/status/1856941766915641580

My interpretation of that tweet is "there is no DATA wall" meaning "we have so much more data we can ingest: all of youtube, all of spotify, all of twitch, every real-time webcam feed on the internet, RL agents playing every video game on steam, and we can extract so much more learning per unit data than we are now" which seems plausible enough to me.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#402

We should put a model in an actual body and let it in the world to build from experiences. Inference is costly though, so the robot would interact during a period and update it's model during another period, flushing the context window (short term memory) into its training set (long term memory).

That seems to be what Tesla is planning to do with Optimus.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#403
post #115

Question for the group here: do we honestly feel like we've exhausted the options for delivering value on top of the current generation of LLMs? I lead a team exploring cutting edge LLM applications and end-user features. It's my intuition from experience that we have a LONG way to go. GPT-4o / Claude 3.5 are the go-to models for my team. Every combination of technical investment + LLMs yields a new list of potential…

I am definitely not an expert, nor do I have inside information on the directions of research that these companies are exploring.

Yes, existing LLMs are useful. Yes, there are many more things we can do with this tech.

However, existing SOTA models are large, expensive to run, still hallucinate, fail simple logic tests, fail to do things a poorly trained human can do on autopilot, etc.

The performance of LLMs is extremely variable, and it is hard to anticipate failure.

Many potential applications of this technology will not tolerate this level of uncertainty. Worse solutions with predictable and well understood shortcomings will dominate.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#404

A few important things to remember here: The best engineering minds have been focused on scaling transformer pre and post training for the last three years because they had good reason to believe it would work, and it has up until now. Progress has been measured against benchmarks which are / were largely solvable with scale. There is another emerging paradigm which is still small(er) scale but showing remarkable res…

Once we've scraped the internet of its data, we need more data. Robots can take in video/audio data 24/7 and can be placed in your house to record this data by offering services like cooking/cleaning/folding laundry. Yeah, I'll pay $20k to have you record everything that happens in my house if I can stop doing dishes for five years!

There already exists a robot that does the dishes, it's called a dishwasher.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#405
It's kind of, I don't know, "weird", observing how there's all these news outlets reporting on how essentially every up-and-coming model has not performed as expected, while all the employees at these labs haven't changed their tune in the slightest.

And there's a number of reasons why, mostly likely being that they've found other ways to get improvements out of AI models, so diminishing returns on training aren't that much of a problem. Or, maybe the leakers are lying, but I highly doubt that considering the past record of news outlets reporting on accurate leaked information.

Still though, it's interesting how basically ever frontier lab created a model that didn't live up to expectations, and every employee at these labs on Twitter has continued to vague-post and hype as if nothing ever happened.

It's honestly hard to tell whether or not they really know something we don't, or if they have an irrational exuberance for AGI bordering on cult-like, and they will never be able to mentally process, let alone admit, that something might be wrong.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#406
post #115

Question for the group here: do we honestly feel like we've exhausted the options for delivering value on top of the current generation of LLMs? I lead a team exploring cutting edge LLM applications and end-user features. It's my intuition from experience that we have a LONG way to go. GPT-4o / Claude 3.5 are the go-to models for my team. Every combination of technical investment + LLMs yields a new list of potential…

In my view, an escape hatch if we are truly stuck would be radical speed ups (like Cerebras) in compute time. If we get outputs in milli-seconds instead of seconds and at much lower costs, it would make backtracking viable. This won't allow AGI, but can make a new class of apps possible.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long context is a scam. Claude is best but it’s still gets lost with longer context

In my experience, the reality of long context windows doesn’t live up to the hype. When you’re iterating on something, whether it's code, text, or any document, you end up with multiple versions layered in the context. Every time you revise, those earlier versions stick around, even though only the latest one is the "most correct". What gets pushed out isn’t the last version of the document itself (since it’s FIFO),…

I like the idea of context editing and threaded conversations. I think I have seen some alternative UIs on HN that support branching.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#408
Based on recent rumblings about AI scaling hitting a wall, of which this article is perhaps the most visible - and in a high-reach financial publication, I'm considering increasing my estimated probability we might see a major market correction next year (and possibly even a bubble collapse). (example: "CONFIRMED: LLMs have indeed reached a point of diminishing returns" https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/confirmed-llms-have-indeed...).

To be clear, I don't think a near-term bubble collapse is likely but I'm going from 3% to maybe ~10%. Also, this doesn't mean I doubt there's real long-term value to be delivered or money to be made in AI solutions. I'm thinking specifically about those who've been speculatively funding the massive build out of data centers, energy and GPU supply expecting near-term demand to continue scaling at the recent unprecedented rates. My understanding is much of this is being funded in advance of actual end-user demand at these elevated levels and it is being funded either by VC money or debt by parties who could struggle to come up with the cash to pay for what they've ordered if either user demand or their equity value doesn't continue scaling as expected.

Admittedly this scenario assumes that these investment commitments are sufficiently speculative and over-committed to create bubble dynamics and tipping points. The hypothesis goes like this: the money sources who've over-committed to lock up scarce future supply in the expectation it will earn outsize returns have already started seeing these warning signs of efficiency and/or progress rates slowing which are now hitting mainstream media. Thus it's possible there is already a quiet collapse beginning wherein the largest AI data center GPU purchasers might start trying to postpone future delivery schedules and may soon start trying to downsize or even cancel existing commitments or try to offload some of their future capacity via sub-leasing it out before it even arrives, etc. Being a dynamic market, this could trigger a rapidly snowballing avalanche of falling prices for next-year AI compute (which is already bought and sold as a commodity like pork belly futures).

Notably, there are now rumors claiming some of the largest players don't currently have the cash to pay for what they've already committed to for future delivery. They were making calculated bets they'd be able to raise or borrow that capital before payments were due. Except if expectation begins to turn downward, fresh investors will be scarce and banks will reprice a GPU's value as loan collateral down to pennies on the dollar (shades of the 2009 financial crisis where the collateral value of residential real estate assets was marked down). As in most bubbles, cheap credit is the fuel driving growth and that credit can get more expensive very quickly - which can in turn trigger exponential contagion effects causing the bubble to pop. A very different kind of "Foom" than many AI financial speculators were betting on! :-)

So... in theory, under this scenario sometime next year NVidia/TSMC and other top-of-supply-chain companies could find themselves with excess inventories of advanced node wafers because a significant portion of their orders were from parties who no longer have access to the cheap capital to pay for them. And trying to sue so many customers for breach can take a long time and, in a large enough sector collapse, be only marginally successful in recouping much actual cash.

I'd be interested in hearing counter-arguments (or support) for the impossibility (or likelihood) of such a scenario.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#409
post #191
post #115

Question for the group here: do we honestly feel like we've exhausted the options for delivering value on top of the current generation of LLMs? I lead a team exploring cutting edge LLM applications and end-user features. It's my intuition from experience that we have a LONG way to go. GPT-4o / Claude 3.5 are the go-to models for my team. Every combination of technical investment + LLMs yields a new list of potential…

No. The scaling laws may be dead. Does this mean the end of LLM advances? Absolutely not. There are many different ways to improve LLM capabilities. Everyone was mostly focused on the scaling laws because that worked extremely well (actually surprising most of the researchers). But if you're keeping an eye on the scientific papers coming out about AI, you've seen the astounding amount of research going on with some v…

> Everyone was mostly focused on the scaling laws because that worked extremely well

Also because it was easy, and expense was not the first concern.

Re: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic are struggling to build more advanced AI

#410

not long ago these people would have you believe that a next word predictor trained on reddit posts would somehow lead to artificial general superintelligence

I don't understand why you'd be so dismissive about this. It's looking less likely that it'll end up happening, but is it any less believable than getting general intelligence by training a blob of meat?

Yes, because that already happened.
Post reply on HN