631–640 of 678 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Elon is driven by money per se. I think he just wants to see expensive cool shit happen in his lifetime.
I wish he'd choose to do expensive cool shit that helped people or cured diseases and stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean nobody needs to bother with anecdotes here. chatgpt.com hit 3.7B visits in October and was #8 in worldwide internet traffic. Open AI say they have 300M weekly active users and 1B messages per day . The idea that it's some fad with no utility or that the general public knows little about it is at this point laughable. It's the software product with by far the fastest adoption any software product has ever seen.…
Yes, because it is free . How many paid users? Is a paid user generating profit right now? Google had to inject advertising in its search results to start earning real money. What will OpenAI do? That's the PMF.
They had some estimated 10M paid users a few months ago.
>Is a paid user generating profit right now?
For themselves ? I don't know and neither does the person saying they have no PMF.
There is nothing stopping Open AI from inserting ads into GPT's responses, either explicitly with the search tool or weaved into predicted responses.
Their revenue nearly quadrupled year on year and model training and inference costs have reduced by several orders of magnitude in the last few years.
I'm not saying that Open AI are foolproof. But the money being pumped to them is more or less expected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is nobody in these very rich guys' spheres pushing back on their thought process? Yes, frequently and loudly. When Altman was collecting the award at Cambridge the other year, protesters dropped in on the after-award public talk/Q&A session, and he actively empathised with the protestors . > So far we are multiple years in with much investment and little return, and no obvious large-scale product-market fit, much l…
> The product market fit is fantastic. This isn't the first time I've heard random strangers discussing it in public. Hardly the evidence of PMF. There is always something new in the zeitgeist, that every one is talking about, some more so than others . 2 years before it was VR, few years before that NFTs and blockchain everything, before that it was self driving cars before that personal voice assistants like Siri a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Self-driving is not so much a technological problem as it is a political problem. We have built a network of roads that (self-evidently) can't be safely navigated by humans, so it's not fair to demand better performance of machines. At least, not as long as they have to share the road with us. 'AI' landings on Mars are the only kind of landings possible, due to latency. JPL indisputably pwned that problem long before…
The cars are still worse than humans.
In any case the robots are getting better. Are we?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, he wasn't that far off. The Turing test is well and truly beaten, regardless of how you define it, and I sure wouldn't want to go up against o1-pro in a programming or math contest. Robotics being "solved" was indeed a stupid thing to assert because that's a hornet's nest of wicked problems in material science, mechanical engineering, and half a dozen other fields. Given a suitable robotic platform, though, 2…
> The Turing test is well and truly beaten, regardless of how you define it Unless the question the human asks is 'How many l's in llama'
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> no obvious large-scale product-market fit I mean, I know pessimistically "ackshually"-ing yourself into the wrong side of history is kind of Hackernews's thing (eg. that famous dropbox comment). But if you don't think OpenAI found product-market-fit with ChatGPT, then I don't think you understand what product-market-fit is...
There is no killer app (yet). Chat is nice and there's various tools that are useful to devs. But broadly, there is no killer app that makes _everyone_ adopt it and gladly pay for it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_application
How is ChatGPT not a killer app ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> no obvious large-scale product-market fit I mean, I know pessimistically "ackshually"-ing yourself into the wrong side of history is kind of Hackernews's thing (eg. that famous dropbox comment). But if you don't think OpenAI found product-market-fit with ChatGPT, then I don't think you understand what product-market-fit is...
There is no killer app (yet). Chat is nice and there's various tools that are useful to devs. But broadly, there is no killer app that makes _everyone_ adopt it and gladly pay for it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_application
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, AI have been doing both farm work and "building things under supervision" work for a while now. Robots are a thing, AI controlling robots is a thing.
Robots at this point are specialized for a highly specific task. None of them are as dynamically deployable as a 80 IQ person. You can let a walk around a construction site doing whatever, no such robot is available right now. If I'm wrong please post where I can buy such a general robot.
A quick google got me this list of current uses, I'd suggest you can skim the first part as it will be clear when you get to the actual examples: https://builtin.com/robotics/humanoid-robots
(But disregard Atlas, IIRC Boston Dynamics don't sell that, only the robot dogs? But you didn't actually ask for a humanoid, so you can have the dogs as a replacement).
I've seen demos from Agility before this: https://agilityrobotics.com/
Likewise Figure being tested in BMW: https://www.figure.ai/
And are you really sure about what it means to be an IQ 80 human? Because that's where people start having problems reading plans, safety instructions, timesheets etc., or following multi-step instructions, handling unexpected situations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two years ago half of what it output was incorrect. One year ago, maybe 30% of what it output was incorrect. Currently, maybe 20% of what it tells you is incorrect. It's getting better. Google, on the other hand, is unequivocally getting worse.
Rubbish - there's no data that shows accuracy has improved by that much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Robots at this point are specialized for a highly specific task. None of them are as dynamically deployable as a 80 IQ person. You can let a walk around a construction site doing whatever, no such robot is available right now. If I'm wrong please post where I can buy such a general robot.
Robots are hardware, AI is software, so in principle you can put any AI in charge of any robot. A quick google got me this list of current uses, I'd suggest you can skim the first part as it will be clear when you get to the actual examples: https://builtin.com/robotics/humanoid-robots (But disregard Atlas, IIRC Boston Dynamics don't sell that, only the robot dogs? But you didn't actually ask for a humanoid, so you c…
The robots in the links you posted are either not commercially available or not capable of working in an unrestricted construction environment. Such an environment do require a humanoid frame at this time because the entire world is geared to that. I agree that a few show promising demos, but that's not what I would "available". Perhaps I should have been more clear. Unless I(As in some rando corporation) can go out and buy it I don't consider it available.