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

771–780 of 915 posts

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

#771

Post by cheema33 »

cruffle_duffle wrote: post #722
freediddy wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft didn't sell anything. OpenAI created more shares and sold those to investors, so Microsoft's stake is getting diluted. And Microsoft only paid $10B for that stake for the most recognizable name brand for AI around the world. They don't need to "hedge their bets" it's already a humongous win. Why let Altman continue to call the shots and decrease Microsoft's ownership stake and ability to dictate how OpenAI…

I think people are looking for excuses to declare OpenAI and Anthropic teetering on the brink of failure when the actual reality is… they are wildly successful by absolutely any measure. This deal is proof. If Microsoft didn’t believe in OpenAI they wouldn’t have restructured it this way. They’d have tightened their reins and brought in “adult supervision”

> I think people are looking for excuses to declare OpenAI and Anthropic teetering on the brink of failure when the actual reality is… they are wildly successful by absolutely any measure.

Maybe that will be true someday. But, right now, they are burning billions of dollars every quarter. Their expenses far far outweigh their income and they are nowhere near profitability.

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

#772

Post by az226 »

_jab wrote: post #13

This agreement feels so friendly towards OpenAI that it's not obvious to me why Microsoft accepted this. I guess Microsoft just realized that the previous agreement was kneecapping OpenAI so much that the investment was at risk, especially with serious competition now coming from Anthropic?

OpenAI found a way to circumvent the exclusivity. The deal was poorly defined by Microsoft. OpenAI had started selling a service on AWS that had a stateful component to it, not purely an API. Obviously Microsoft didn’t like that and confronted Altman, and this is the settlement of that confrontation, OpenAI doesn’t need to do workarounds, Microsoft won’t sue to enforce exclusivity, and Microsoft doesn’t have to pay dev share to OpenAI. AWS is a much bigger market so OpenAI doesn’t care.

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

#773

Post by bigyabai »

nl wrote: post #694
zozbot234 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A Opus 4.7/Gpt5.5 class model is 5 trillion parameters[1]. You could run it on a cluster of nodes that each do some mix of fetching parameters from disk and caching them in RAM. Use pipeline parallelism to minimize network bandwidth requirements given the huge size. Then time to first token may be a bit slow, but sustained inference should achieve enough throughput for a single user. That's a costly setup of course…

> You could run it on a cluster of nodes Not sure this is a MBP either.

Not even a cluster of Mac Pros could run a dense 5T parameter model with RDMA, to my knowledge.

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

#774

Post by benterix »

binary0010 wrote: post #220
benterix wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 1) your answer had nothing to do with the question, 2) you quoted a slogan that life verified as false.

[flagged]

The question was about their redefinition of AGI in economical terms for which others provided links, not the one from their (obviously fake) mission statement.

BTW I didn't downwote you (I hate it, if many people downvote a comment it's harder to read), I was just trying to explain why others did. On second thought, my comment was wrong, because your answer was related to the question but it wasn't really the intended one.

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

#775

Post by CMay »

ttul wrote: post #612
maxclark wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And almost by happenstance Apple. Turns out they have a great platform for inference and torched almost nothing comparatively on Siri. The Apple/Gemini deal is interesting, Google continues to demonstrate their willingness to degrade their experience on Apple to try and force people to switch.

If you do the math (I did), in 2 years, open source models that you can run on a future MacBook Pro will be as capable as the frontier cloud models are today. Memory bandwidth is growing rapidly, as is the die area dedicated to the neural cores. And all the while, we have the silicon getting more power efficient and increasingly dense (as it always does). These hardware improvements are coming along as the open sourc…

So long as you don't require deep search grounding like massive web indexes or document stores which are hard to reproduce locally. You can do local agentic things that get close or even do better depending on search strategy, but theoretically a massive cloud service with huge data stores at hand should be able to produce better results.

In practice unless you're doing some kind of deep research thing with the cloud, it'll try to optimize mostly for time and get you a good enough answer rather than spending an hour or two. An hour of cloud searching with huge data stores is not equivalent to an hour of local agentic searching, presumably.

I think that problem will improve a little in the coming years as we kind of create optimized data curation, but the information world will keep growing so the advantage will likely remain with centralized services as long as they offer their complete potential rather than a fraction.

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

#776

Post by [deleted] »

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?

[deleted]

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

#777

Post by OlivOnTech »

freakynit wrote: post #702
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.

Had written a blog post on the same a few days back, if anyone's interested in readng (hardly 5 minute read): Can Google Win the AI Hardware Race Through TPUs? https://google-ai-race.pagey.site/

Hello, your link says "~20 min read" wich seems to be the case!

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

#778

Post by rawoke083600 »

gchamonlive wrote: post #656
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…

Nobody is winning any UX prize there. Azure, AWS, GCP... they are all terrible. Back then GCP for instance used to only work reliably on chromo-based browsers. Azure has that horrible overlay UI that abuses extended real estate that just doesn't work. But azure wins most prizes for being terrible becuase, among other things, https://isolveproblems.substack.com/p/how-microsoft-vaporize... . It's not the worst provider…

Check out hetzner ui (regardless if you like their services, i know some ppl have opions or experiences lol) BUT, their cloud ux/ui is fantasties for a cloud company!

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

#779

Post by wolvoleo »

jiggawatts wrote: post #728
wolvoleo wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things I find about AWS is that every service UI feels different. It's like every service was designed by a totally different team. For all its flaws at least Azure has consistent UI.

> It's like every service was designed by a totally different team. Yes, by design. Conceptually this improves velocity and reduces the blast radius of failure. In practice, everything depends on IAM, S3, VPC, and EC2 directly or indirectly, so this doesn't help anywhere near as much as one would think. Azure and GCP have a split control plane where there's a global register of resources, but the back-end implementat…

> Conceptually this improves velocity and reduces the blast radius of failure.

Hm yes but I hate working with it as a customer because it is so confusing. Everything works differently and there is a lot of overlap (several services exist that do the same thing). It seems like an amateurish patchwork.

I understand it has benefits to have different teams working on different services but those teams should still be aligned in terms of UX and basic concepts.

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

#780

Post by Hendrikto »

csunoser wrote: post #390
philippta wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I am not sure what context Jensen said that. But midjourney uses tpu. Apple uses tpu. They are no other frontier labs that use it, but Google + Anthropic is 2 out of 3 frontier lab so..... You could reasonably say that "A majority of frontier labs uses TPU to train and serve their model."

Afaik, TPUs are only used for inference, not training. Maybe that was also what the quote referred to.
Post reply on HN