Does it matter that the people who dedicated the last decade to developing breakthrough work have left? It is a mistake to think that their luck streak will continue and their departure isn't a sign of decay at OpenAI. They may as well cash-in on their notoriety while it is of value. The odds are more in favor of other teams blazing new trails.
Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
591–600 of 855 posts
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#592Interesting, both Karpathy and Sutskever are gone from OpenAI now. Looks like it is now the Sam Altman and Greg Brockman show. I have to admit, of the four, Karpathy and Sutskever were the two I was most impressed with. I hope he goes on to do something great.
Top 6 science guys are long gone. Open AI is run by marketing, business, software and productization people. When the next wave of new deep learning innovations sweeps the world, Microsoft eats whats left of them. They make lots of money, but don't have future unless they replace what they lost.
What an absurd thing to say.
John Schulman is still at OpenAI. As are many others.
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#593Earlier quoted context omitted.
So Satya Nadella paid $13 billion to have....Sam Altman :-))
Are you suggesting that the OAI investment was not a good investment for MS?
Have they earned a return on it yet?
Seriously asking; I've purchased a GitHub CoPilot license subscription but I don't know what their sales numbers are doing on AI in general. It's to be seen if it can be made more cost-efficient to deliver to consumers.
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#594Earlier quoted context omitted.
Top 6 science guys are long gone. Open AI is run by marketing, business, software and productization people. When the next wave of new deep learning innovations sweeps the world, Microsoft eats whats left of them. They make lots of money, but don't have future unless they replace what they lost.
If we look at history of innovation and invention it’s very typical the original discovery and final productization are done by different people. For many reasons, but a lot of them are universal I would say. E.g. Oppenheimer’s team created the bomb, then following experts finetuned the subsequent weapon systems and payload designs. Etc.
Except OpenAI hasn’t yet finished discovery on its true goal: AGI. I wonder if they risk plateauing at a local maximum.
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#595Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They have the next iteration of GPT Sutskever helped to finalize How do you know that they have the next GPT? How do you know what Sutskever contributed? (There was talk that the most valuable contributions came from the less well known researchers not from him)
sha256:e33135417f7f5b8f4a1c98c28cf26330bea4cc6b120765f59f5d518ea0ce80e5
[deleted]
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#596Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but the phrase "So long, and thanks for everything" used in the tweet reminds me of "So long, and thanks for all the fish" from the dolphins in The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy. The background there is that dolphins are secretly more intelligent than humans, and are leaving Earth without them when its destruction is imminent (something the humans don't see coming). I did once leav…
In that metaphor, is openai the humans or are actual humans the humans? So is openai about to be destroyed or humanity?
The dolphins are actually openai
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#597Earlier quoted context omitted.
The majority of the developers may know what LLMs are in an abstract sense, but I meet very few that really realize what these are. These LLMs are an exponential leap in computational capability. The next revolution is going to be when people realize what we have already, because it is extremely clear the majority do not. RAG? Chatbots? Those applications are toys compared to what LLMS can do right now, yet everyone…
> The next revolution is going to be when people realize what we have already Enlighten us
I agree with OP, I think we still have no idea yet what dreams may come of the LLM's we have today. So no one will be able to "enlighten us" — perhaps not until we're looking in the rear-view mirror.
I would say instead, stay tuned.
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#598Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am just curious how it happened to Google? Like who were the product managers or others who didn't see an opportunity here exactly where the whole thing was invented and they had huge amounts of data already, whole web basically and the amount of video that no one else can ever hope to have?
I’m 100% positive lots of people at Google were chomping at the bit to productize LLMs early on. But the reality is, LLMs are a cannibalization threat to Search. And the Search Monopoly is the core money making engine of the entire company. Classic innovators dilemma. No fat-and-happy corporate executive would ever say yes to putting lots of resources behind something risky that might also kill the golden goose. The…
Golden goose is already being hoisted upon a spit — and your company is not even going to get even drippings of the fat. I am surprised by the short-sightedness of execs.
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#599Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am just curious how it happened to Google? Like who were the product managers or others who didn't see an opportunity here exactly where the whole thing was invented and they had huge amounts of data already, whole web basically and the amount of video that no one else can ever hope to have?
It's hard to invest millions in employees who are likely to leave to a competitor later. That's very risky, aka venture.
So the alternative is to...?
Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI
#600Earlier quoted context omitted.
Top 6 science guys are long gone. Open AI is run by marketing, business, software and productization people. When the next wave of new deep learning innovations sweeps the world, Microsoft eats whats left of them. They make lots of money, but don't have future unless they replace what they lost.
If we look at history of innovation and invention it’s very typical the original discovery and final productization are done by different people. For many reasons, but a lot of them are universal I would say. E.g. Oppenheimer’s team created the bomb, then following experts finetuned the subsequent weapon systems and payload designs. Etc.
> If we look at history of innovation and invention it’s very typical the original discovery and final productization are done by different people.
You don't really need to look at history, that's basically science vs engineering in a nutshell.
Maybe history could tell us if that's an accident or a division that arose out of 'natural' occurrence, but I suppose a question for an economist or psychologist or sociologist how natural that could really be anyway or if it's biased by e.g. academics not financially motivated because it happens that there isn't money there; so they don't care about productising; leaving it for others who are so motivated.