In the interim (or possibly long term), Google could co-exist with OpenAI. In my little corner of the universe (fire safety engineering), I cannot assume the output produced from ChatGPT is correct. I’m always trying to find out which references it has used for the answer and then having to check if it has actually used it in the context the original author intended. In short I’m still using Google and other search engines to check output from ChatGPT.
Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
441–450 of 1001 posts
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#442> "We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI" and neither does Coca Cola and Cadbury. Yet biggest monopolies are found in these places. Because the competitors will not be differentiated enough for users to switch from the incumbent. But G-AI is still nascent and there's lots of improvements to be had. I suspect better tech is a moat but ofcourse Google is oblivious to it.
Brand loyalty is a moat. So I wouldn't say that Coca-Cola doesn't have a moat. In addition, economies of scale allow them to produce more cheaply + advertise more + distribute wider than competitors. Compare Coca-Cola to some beverage company I start tomorrow:
- Nobody's tasted my beverage, therefore nobody is craving its taste. Whereas billions of people are "addicted" to coke: they know what it tastes like and miss it when it's gone.
- Nobody's ever heard of my business. I have zero trust or loyalty. Whereas people have trusted code for a century, and actually consider themselves loyal to that company over others with similar goods.
- I have no money to buy ads with. Coke is running Super Bowl commercials.
- I have no distribution partnerships. Coke is in every vending machine and every restaurant. They've spread to almost every country, and even differentiated the taste to appeal to local taste buds.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Midjourney is more popular (from what I'm seeing) than Stable Diffusion at the moment because it's better at the moment. Midjourney is closed-source. Midjourney is easier, its not better. The low barrier to entry has it popular, but it isnt as realistic, doesnt follow the prompt as well, and has almost no customization. SD is the holy grail of AI art, if you can afford a computer or server to run SD + have the abili…
That seems to depend on your use case. Frankly, I don't have much use for either of them but Midjourney was much closer. I've twice spent a couple of hours unsuccessfully trying to generate a simple background image that would be blurred out when rendering 3D models. SD out-of-the-box was far worse, but Midjourney still was not up to the task. It's incredible how well they can generate images of nearly any subject/ob…
ControlNet helps a lot with composition and lighting (https://sandner.art/create-atmospheric-effects-in-stable-dif...). It requires more work than just entering a prompt, but probably less work than doing it manually once you get used to it. I think there's a number of StableDiffusion clients in development that are trying to make this easier.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#444Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the problem with AI being everywhere and ubiquitous is that AI is the first technology in a very long time that requires non-trivial compute power. That compute power costs money. This is why you only get a limited number of messages every few hours from GPT4. It simply costs too much to be a ubiquitous technology. For example, the biggest LLama model only runs on an A100 that costs about $15,000 on ebay. The…
Within a decade mid-level consumer cards will be just as powerful as those $40k cards.
[deleted]
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the problem with AI being everywhere and ubiquitous is that AI is the first technology in a very long time that requires non-trivial compute power. That compute power costs money. This is why you only get a limited number of messages every few hours from GPT4. It simply costs too much to be a ubiquitous technology. For example, the biggest LLama model only runs on an A100 that costs about $15,000 on ebay. The…
Within a decade mid-level consumer cards will be just as powerful as those $40k cards.
Considering how long it took mid level consumer cards to beat my $600 1080, you're way more optimistic than I am.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#446The current paradigm is that AI is a destination. A product you go to and interact with. That's not at all how the masses are going to interact with AI in the near future. It's going to be seamlessly integrated into every-day software. In Office/Google docs, at the operating system level (Android), in your graphics editor (Adobe), on major web platforms: search, image search, Youtube, the like. Since Google and other…
It being everywhere worries me a lot. It outputs a lot of false information and the typical person doesn’t have the time or inclination to vet the output. Maybe this is a problem that will be solved. I’m not optimistic on that front.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#447The current paradigm is that AI is a destination. A product you go to and interact with. That's not at all how the masses are going to interact with AI in the near future. It's going to be seamlessly integrated into every-day software. In Office/Google docs, at the operating system level (Android), in your graphics editor (Adobe), on major web platforms: search, image search, Youtube, the like. Since Google and other…
Google makes almost all its money from search. These platforms are all there to reinforce its search monopoly. ChatGPT has obsoleted search. ChatGPT will do to Google search what the Internet did to public libraries - make them mostly irrelevant.
How has ChatGPT obsoleted search, when hallucination and the token limits are major problems?
It's (sort of) obviated search for certain kinds of queries engineers make, but not normies.
I say sort of, because IMO it's pretty bad at spitting out accurate (or even syntactically correct) code for any nontrivial problem. I have to give it lots of corrections, and often it will just invent new code that also is broken in some way.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Midjourney is more popular (from what I'm seeing) than Stable Diffusion at the moment because it's better at the moment. Midjourney is closed-source. Midjourney is easier, its not better. The low barrier to entry has it popular, but it isnt as realistic, doesnt follow the prompt as well, and has almost no customization. SD is the holy grail of AI art, if you can afford a computer or server to run SD + have the abili…
Are you sure about this? For the couple things I tried, a colleague with Midjourney managed to outperform my attempts with SD by leaps and bounds.
There's a higher "skill ceiling" with SD. You can install different models for different styles or subjects, use ControlNet for composition, and use plugins to do things you can't easily do with MJ.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#449Is Tensorflow used in any of the OpenSource projects?
I find PyTorch in everyone I check.
Re: Google “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI”
#450How can I get to a point where I can understand the linked article? Is there a book or course I can take? I feel like I have a lot of catching up to do.