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

Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 915 posts

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#601

Post by Yajirobe »

wg0 wrote: post #576
rishabhaiover wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just a random token generator based on token frequency distributions with no real thought process I'm not smart enough to reduce LLMs and the entire ai effort into such simple terms but I am smart enough to see the emergence of a new kind of intelligence even when it threatens the very foundations of the industry that I work for.

It's an illusion of intelligence. Just like when a non technical person saw the TV for the first time, he thought these people must be living inside that box. He didn't know the 40,000 volt electron gun being bombarded on phosphorus constantly leaving the glow for few milliseconds till next pass. He thought these guys live inside that wooden box there's no other explanation.

What happens when it's indistinguishable from a human speaker (in any conceivable test that makes sense)? It's like a philosophical zombie - imagine that you can't distinguish it from a human mind, there's no test you can make to say that it is NOT conscious/intelligent. So at some point, I think, it makes no sense to say that it's not intelligent.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#602

Post by nayroclade »

lumost wrote: post #532

This sounds like an issue where the hyperscalers are acknowledging that the new Foundation model firms may in fact be worth more than they are. Anthropic looks increasingly likely to exceed AWS revenue next year, and OpenAI will likely do the same with Azure. 3 years ago a Foundation model seemed like a feature of a hyper scaler, now hyper scalers look like part of the supply chain.

I think both got taken by surprise. Last year the talk was that AI was a bubble, demand was soft, pilots projects were failing, etc. Model providers still believed, but thought they had a long ramp up period to build out their own datacenters. Then in late Autumn/Winter, something happened. Model capability reached a threshold and demand exploded, then just kept exploding. Model firms are scrambling to find any compute capacity they can, which means striking any deals problem with hyper scalers. So question is whether model providers can get enough compute without having to effectively sell themselves to hyper scalers.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#603

Post by joefourier »

zendist wrote: post #355
jmward01 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we keep changing the goalposts on AGI. If you gave me CC in the 80's I would probably have called it 'alive' since it clearly passes the Turing test as I understood it then (I wouldn't have been able to distinguish it from a person for most conversations). Now every time it gets better we push that definition further and every crack we open to a chasm and declare that it isn't close. At the same time there ar…

The goal post keeps moving because LLM hypeists keep saying LLMs are "close" to AGI (or even are, already). Any reasonably intelligent individual that knows anything about LLMs obviously rejects those claims, but the rest of the world doesn't. An AGI would not have problems reading an analog clock. Or rather, it would not have a problem realizing it had a problem reading it, and would try to learn how to do it. An AG…

AGI means artificial general intelligence, as opposed to artificial narrow intelligence. General intelligence means being able to generalise to many tasks beyond the single narrow one that an AI has been designed/trained on, and LLMs fit that description perfectly, being able to do anything from writing poetry, programming, summarising documents, translating, NLP, and if multi-modal, vision, audio, image generation... not all to human-level performance, but certainly to a useful one. As opposed to previous AI that was able to do only a single thing, like play chess or classify images, and had no way of being generalised to other tasks.

LLMs aren't artificial superintelligence and might not reach that point, but refusing to call them AGI is absolutely moving the goalposts.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#604

Post by lokar »

jiggawatts wrote: post #555
gchamonlive wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No and at this point tying yourself to azure is a strategic passive and anyone making such decisions should be held responsible for any service outage or degradation.

This is certainly... an opinion. AWS's us-east-1 famously takes down either a bunch of companies with it, or causes global outages on the regular. AWS has a terrible, terrible user interface partly because it is partitioned by service and region on purpose to decrease the "blast radius" of a failure, which is a design decision made totally pointless by having a bunch of their most critical services in one region, whi…

I don’t see how you could care (a lot) about both the UI and reliability.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#605

Post by imtringued »

rishabhaiover wrote: post #552
thanhhaimai wrote: post #241

Opinions are my own. I think the biggest winner of this might be Google. Virtually all the frontier AI labs use TPU. The only one that doesn't use TPU is OpenAI due to the exclusive deal with Microsoft. Given the newly launched Gen 8 TPU this month, it's likely OpenAI will contemplate using TPU too.

The only reason anyone uses a TPU is because they couldn't get the best GPUs.

Okay? I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Google's TPUs have obvious advantages for inference and are competitive for training.

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#606

Post by coder-3 »

mattnewton wrote: post #560
gpt5 wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is AMD not more popular then if labs are so flexibly with giving away CUDA?

people are trying, especially for inference. For training, it’s just too high risk to tank your training I think. TPUs are at least dogfooded by Google deepmind, no team AFAIK has gotten the AMD stack to train well.

Interesting. Why? My current mental model is that AMD chips are just a bit behind, so, less efficient, but no biggie. Do labs even use CUDA?

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#607

Post by VirusNewbie »

philippta wrote: post #372
thanhhaimai wrote: post #241

Opinions are my own. I think the biggest winner of this might be Google. Virtually all the frontier AI labs use TPU. The only one that doesn't use TPU is OpenAI due to the exclusive deal with Microsoft. Given the newly launched Gen 8 TPU this month, it's likely OpenAI will contemplate using TPU too.

In the recent Dwarkesh Podcast episode Jensen Huang (Nvidia) said that virtually nobody but Anthropic uses TPUs. How does that add up?

He forgot one other big company that uses TPUs besides Anthropic...

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#608

Post by Lucasoato »

airstrike wrote: post #22

Kagi Translate was kind enough to turn this from LinkedIn Speak to English: The Microsoft and OpenAI situation just got messy. We had to rewrite the contract because the old one wasn't working for anyone. Basically, we’re trying to make it look like we’re still friends while we both start seeing other people. Here is what’s actually happening: 1. Microsoft is still the main guy, but if they can't keep up with the tec…

Do you do also weddings?

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#609

Post by ignoramous »

thanhhaimai wrote: post #241

Opinions are my own. I think the biggest winner of this might be Google. Virtually all the frontier AI labs use TPU. The only one that doesn't use TPU is OpenAI due to the exclusive deal with Microsoft. Given the newly launched Gen 8 TPU this month, it's likely OpenAI will contemplate using TPU too.

> The only one that doesn't use TPU is OpenAI

For inference? This is from July 2025: OpenAI tests Google TPUs amid rising inference cost concerns, https://www.networkworld.com/article/4015386/openai-tests-go... / https://archive.vn/zhKc4

> ... due to the exclusive deal with Microsoft

This exclusivity went away in Oct 2025 (except for 'API' workloads).

  OpenAI has contracted to purchase an incremental $250B of Azure services, and Microsoft will no longer have a right of first refusal to be OpenAI’s compute provider.
https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2025/10/28/the-next-chapter... / https://archive.vn/1eF0V

Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal

#610

Post by jiggawatts »

lokar wrote: post #604
jiggawatts wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is certainly... an opinion. AWS's us-east-1 famously takes down either a bunch of companies with it, or causes global outages on the regular. AWS has a terrible, terrible user interface partly because it is partitioned by service and region on purpose to decrease the "blast radius" of a failure, which is a design decision made totally pointless by having a bunch of their most critical services in one region, whi…

I don’t see how you could care (a lot) about both the UI and reliability.

One is caused by the other. Amazons engineers decided to split the interface in a “user hostile” manner with the stated purpose of increasing reliability… which didn’t materialise. The clunky UI did.

Or maybe you can provide a better explanation for why users had to “hunt” through hundreds(!) of product-region combinations to find that last lingering service they were getting billed $0.01 a month for?

This just doesn’t happen in GCP or Azure. You get a single pane of glass.

Post reply on HN