Live data from Hacker News

Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

cnbc.com

451–459 of 459 posts

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#451
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is something to reconsider, especially if you genuinely don't perceive the difference of value between Juicero and a product that has been adopted by 100 million users in its first 2 months. Really, you can believe me, outside Silicon Valley, nobody cares or cared about Juicero. This is very different for ChatGPT, and I'm sure that if you get interested to it you'll find interesting usages with it that can…

ChatGPT frenzy goes all the way to China. They are reacting with "huge excitement", but also realising how far behind they are.

I stopped considering ChatGPT to be niche/nerdy phenomenon after, less than two weeks after release, I overheard some random Polish commentary youtubers (the YouTube equivalent of mass market celebrity gossip, except more self-referential) showcasing the chatbot and voicing their opinions about large language models.

One useful thing I learned from this, though, is that ChatGPT can handle Polish just fine. It never even occurred to me to try it - I incorrectly assumed the model was trained on English text only. I suspect that being multilingual from day 1 was a huge factor in ChatGPT's sudden and extreme user growth.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#452
post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An important difference, to me, is that a lot of people already have familiarity with ChatGPT; either directly or through friends, family or just news. Most of those folks (judging by my own friends) had very low expectations which ChatGPT blew out of the water. When they read "Microsoft search with ChatGPT" they are looking for integration of at least somewhat known quantity into a not so great (perception-wise) sea…

Google search results have been decreasing in quality quite dramatically in the past few years for me. I need to spend more and more time crafting complex search queries tuned to my needs, and still most of the results are more or less irrelevant. Or sometimes it seems to completely ignore the syntax I give it. Basically, Google search does not understand what I'm asking. Sure AI hallucinates stuff, but at least the…

Do you disable any data tracking or personalization? Do you log into a Google account? Do you use a VPN?

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Services. Inevitably some of the queries involve recommending a service, and when you have two equal substitute services in a market, both will pay a certain price to be recommended over the other.

That's a very highfalutin way of saying "ads", which feels like it still has one foot planted squarely in the monetization thinking of yesterday. As lots of other people have pointed out, ads in the midst of a blob of chat output don't work the same way as they do on a page of search results. Search results are impersonal and so putting promoted content in them is less of a personal affront. But if the interface is a…

> the main value proposition of using something like ChatGPT to navigate the internet is that you're putting your trust in it to filter out the noise on your behalf.

Right. That's a transient state, unfortunately - we can trust ChatGPT now because we know OpenAI had neither the time nor resources nor a reason to make their tool biased for commercial purposes (they're busy biasing and constraining it so it doesn't generate too much bad press, but this doesn't affect the trustworthiness of responses to typical queries). A model like this obviously won't be allowed to gain widespread adoption as a search proxy - it's destructive to commercial interests.

> If you can't trust it to actually do that (there's still ad noise in what you get back), then what's the point?

Exactly. The problem is, as users, we have no say in it. If Microsoft and Google decide that conversational interfaces are the future, then we'll be doing searches via ChatGPT-derived sales bots. End of story. Google and Microsoft each have enough clout to unilaterally change how computing works for everyone. And if they both decide to compete on quality of their ML search chatbots, there's no force on Earth that could stop it. Short to mid term, if they want it, we have no choice but to use it (long-term this might create an opening for a competitor to claw back some of the search market with a chatbot-free experience).

> Either people will pay a subscription fee to unlock the utility of an information-distilling agent, or they won't. Trying to sidechain ad revenue into that equation is self-defeating.

This, unfortunately, has been proven false again and again. Newspapers. Radio. Broadcast TV. Cable TV. Music streaming. Video streaming. On-line news and article publishing. And so on.

Advertising is a disease, a cancer that infects and slowly consumes every medium and form of communication we create. Often enough, creation of a new medium is driven by the desire for an alternative, after the old medium became thoroughly consumed by advertising and seems to be reaching terminal stage.

Side-chaining ads into a chatbot interface is going to be even more powerful than ads in normal search results - not only you can tweak the order of recommendations like search engines do today, you can also tweak the tone and language used in the conversational aspects, effectively turning the bot into a sneaky salesman.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whew boy you hit the nail on the head. Google just seems to be aimless at this point, and now with the layoffs (despite their immense profitability) they're going to have a much tougher time hiring and retaining top talent.

I don't understand why the board hasn't ousted Sundar yet -- has he even spearheaded a single successful initiative that wasn't sunsetted within a few years? Seems like you could make an LLM generate product ideas and it would be about equally effective.

Offhand, I don't remember who's on Alphabet's board, but let's take two other leading candidates for Worst Board of All Time:

Yahoo's: had an offer from Microsoft for ~$33B in 2004 or so, declined, and later hired Marissa Mayer. Eventually sold to Verizon for ~$4B.

HP's: hired Carly Fiorina, Mark Hurd, Léo Apotheker, and then Meg Whitman

Modern boards rarely act in any sort of timely manner.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft's GitHub, which is apparently at the forefront of the "LLM revolution" with Copilot, also announced significant cost-cuts. What's your point?

Totally unrelated point to the person you're replying to

The topic of "layoffs" is, in fact, directly related to the topic of "layoffs and other cost-cutting".

Google being "aimless" is pure speculation.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#457
post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would make the argument that top talent wasn’t the contingent that was laid off.

You would be provably wrong.

> provably wrong

How so? I don't see any examples of top talent being fired (barring the scuffles at Twitter, but that isn't FAANG). Most people on my LinkedIn feed being let go are new grads or middle management who ostensibly didn't perform to company expectations of perfromance.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd have to argue that one with ChatGPT. Here's one of the many failures Jobs had during demos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znxQOPFg2mo

chatgpt is incapable of debate. it exudes arrogance and defensiveness when you try to engage in debate. it lacks plasticity of mind, isn’t able to critically evaluate its own position, and is pedantic. boring.

Sounds like an Twitter discussion. Maybe even pass the Turning test:0

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why the board hasn't ousted Sundar yet -- has he even spearheaded a single successful initiative that wasn't sunsetted within a few years? Seems like you could make an LLM generate product ideas and it would be about equally effective.

Offhand, I don't remember who's on Alphabet's board, but let's take two other leading candidates for Worst Board of All Time: Yahoo's: had an offer from Microsoft for ~$33B in 2004 or so, declined, and later hired Marissa Mayer. Eventually sold to Verizon for ~$4B. HP's: hired Carly Fiorina, Mark Hurd, Léo Apotheker, and then Meg Whitman Modern boards rarely act in any sort of timely manner.

> Yahoo's: had an offer from Microsoft for ~$33B in 2004 or so, declined, and later hired Marissa Mayer. Eventually sold to Verizon for ~$4B.

The former Yahoo assets that Verizon didn't purchase -- Yahoo Japan, plus a large stake in Alibaba, and several other investments -- were liquidated for a ~$40B total return to shareholders over the course of several years. So combined that's a 33% increase over Microsoft's offer. Obviously not a great return over like 15 years, but far from "worst board decision of all time" level either.

Microsoft's 2004 board, on the other hand, I have to wonder what they were thinking...

Post reply on HN