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

Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 855 posts

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#781

Post by godelski »

itsoktocry wrote: post #609
kinnth wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI has now evolved beyond just the science and it's biggest issue is in the productization. Finding use cases for what's already available ALONG with new models will be where success lies. ChatGPT is the number 1 brand in AI and as such needs to learn what it's selling, not how its technology works. It always sucks when mission and vision don't align with the nerds ideas, but I think it's probably the best move for b…

> ChatGPT is the number 1 brand in AI and as such needs to learn what it's selling, not how its technology works. I'm not as in tune as some people here so: don't they need both? With the rate at which things are moving, how can it be otherwise?

> With the rate at which things are moving

Things have been moving fast because we had a bunch of top notch scientists in companies paired with top notch salesmen/hype machines. But you need both in combination.

Hypemen make promises that can't be kept, but get absurd amounts of funding for doing so. Scientists fill in as many of the gaps as possible, but also get crazy resources due to the aforementioned funding. Obviously this train can't go forever, but I think you might understand that one of these groups is a bit more important than the other while one of these groups is more of a catalyst (makes things happen faster) for the other.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#782

Post by refulgentis »

VirusNewbie wrote: post #777
mtnGoat wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience differs greatly, company I used to work for did NDA, alpha, beta projects with Google. I was always impressed at how little anyone knew, the fact that nothing was delivered on time, scope creep to the point of almost everything being delayed and most projects were not well thought out nor well architected. I warned one API update would break things if it went live, and it did. Why was the guy from anoth…

>company I used to work for did NDA, alpha, beta projects with Google. Sorry, are you saying you worked with Google Contractors or TSEs or something? I don't understand how you'd be working with product SWEs so I don't know what you're quite saying.

Speaking as Google SWE from 2016-2023: It's hard to explain*, but, because of the rest and vest culture, lack of planning, lack of interest in managing, conflict avoidance, asocial engineers, etc., an incredible amount of tentpole feature work is actually outsourced.

i.e. get the contractors in to rush out the new 5D screensavers, give them the contact info for our screensaver technical lead, and let them work it out. Screensaver technical lead saying they don't have resources for this until 30 months from now is placated. Their tendency to jealously guard code and talk smack is directed at people who will never know. The understanding that you always say "Sir Yes Sir" prevents them from complaining to their manager behind a few nasty comments they'll giggle about to eachother.

Of course, this also saves money too: ex. director-make-work "vision" projects that'll never ship, and are temporary work for worker bees, now can be temporarily staffed. (hence their reference to NDA/alpha/beta)

* especially in the context of the claim that there's 8:1 ratio of late night workers to rest-and-vesters. Crazy.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#783

Post by anonymousab »

CooCooCaCha wrote: post #689
kinnth wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI has now evolved beyond just the science and it's biggest issue is in the productization. Finding use cases for what's already available ALONG with new models will be where success lies. ChatGPT is the number 1 brand in AI and as such needs to learn what it's selling, not how its technology works. It always sucks when mission and vision don't align with the nerds ideas, but I think it's probably the best move for b…

“Its biggest issue is in the productization.” That’s not true at all. The biggest issue is that it doesn’t work. You can’t actually trust ai systems and that’s not a product issue.

> You can’t actually trust ai systems

For a lot of (very profitable) use cases, hallucinations and 80/20 are actually more than good enough. Especially when they are replacing solutions that are even worse.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#784

Post by Capricorn2481 »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #764
Symmetry wrote: post #680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scenario I have in my head is that they had to override the safety team's objections to ship their new models before Google IO happened.

The "safety" team can go eat grass. I don't believe in AI "safety measures" any more than I do in kitchen cleaver safety measures. That is, nothing beyond "keep out of kids' reach" and "don't use it like an idiot" but let the cleaver be a damn cleaver.

> That is, nothing beyond "keep out of kids' reach" and "don't use it like an idiot" but let the cleaver be a damn cleaver.

Neither of which will be enforced with AI

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#785

Post by teaearlgraycold »

golergka wrote: post #504
cm2187 wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you extend the window a little bit, along Yes Minister, Idiocracy and Demolition Man (the last two being a documentary of our time filmed 20y ago).

> Idiocracy I definitely enjoyed this movie, and it's understandable that people of any era, starting with ancient Greece, enjoy lamenting at how stupid people are becoming. However, as long as videos explaining quantum physics and 4-hour long interviews with historians and engineers are still one of the most popular kinds of content on Youtube, I would suggest that it's not a documentary, at least not yet.

It’s always been the case that most people are mediocre in terms of intelligence. That’s something we should be able to accept. What I want for the future is for more people to be good and happy.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#786

Post by Jensson »

jagrsw wrote: post #780
Jensson wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first AGI will probably take way too much compute to have a significant effect, unless there is a revolution in architecture that gets us fast and cheap AGI at once the AGI revolution will be very slow and gradual. A model that is as good as an average human but costs $10 000 per effective manhour to run is not very useful, but it is still an AGI.

> A model that is as good as an average human but costs $10 000 per effective manhour to run is not very useful, but it is still an AGI. Geohot ( https://geohot.github.io/blog/ ) estimates that a human brain equivalent requires 20 PFLOPS. Current top-of-the-line GPUs are around 2 PFLOPS and consume up to 500W. Scaling that linearly results in 5kW, which translates to approximately 3 EUR per hour if I calculate correc…

That is if the first model we make is as efficient as a human.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#787

Post by jdthedisciple »

Capricorn2481 wrote: post #784
jdthedisciple wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "safety" team can go eat grass. I don't believe in AI "safety measures" any more than I do in kitchen cleaver safety measures. That is, nothing beyond "keep out of kids' reach" and "don't use it like an idiot" but let the cleaver be a damn cleaver.

> That is, nothing beyond "keep out of kids' reach" and "don't use it like an idiot" but let the cleaver be a damn cleaver. Neither of which will be enforced with AI

Exactly, just like I can't "enforce" another person to not be an idiot about anything.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#788

Post by cma »

trashtester wrote: post #630
itsoktocry wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Crypto currencies has the potential to grow the world economy by about 1-3%, as banking fees go down. Bank fees don't disappear into the ether when they're collected, so I doubt they have this much affect. Oh, made my very first retail purchase with Bitcoin the other day. While the process was pretty slick and easy, the network charged $15.00 in fees. Long way to go until "free".

> Bank fees don't disappear into the ether when they're collected, so I doubt they have this much affect. 1-3% was intended as a ceiling for what cryptocurrency could bring to the economy, after adjusting for the reduction in inflation once those costs are gone.

He's saying the fees aren't burned like with mining, so they don't hurt the economy by the amount of the fee: the profit portion of them goes into other investments. The fees hinder parts of the economy making some transactions nonviable, but they don't fully translate to "friction" making waste heat so much as something more adiabatic that goes back in. It's largely an extraneous spring in the system, not a damper.

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#789

Post by trashtester »

cma wrote: post #788
trashtester wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bank fees don't disappear into the ether when they're collected, so I doubt they have this much affect. 1-3% was intended as a ceiling for what cryptocurrency could bring to the economy, after adjusting for the reduction in inflation once those costs are gone.

He's saying the fees aren't burned like with mining, so they don't hurt the economy by the amount of the fee: the profit portion of them goes into other investments. The fees hinder parts of the economy making some transactions nonviable, but they don't fully translate to "friction" making waste heat so much as something more adiabatic that goes back in. It's largely an extraneous spring in the system, not a damper.

That's why I stated that 1-3% was the ceiling

Re: Ilya Sutskever to leave OpenAI

#790

Post by JohnFen »

javaunsafe2019 wrote: post #733
appplication wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To this end, OpenAI is already off track. Their “GPT marketplace” or whatever they’re calling it is just misguided flailing from a product perspective.

Ain’t there this pattern that innovations comes in waves and that the companies of the first wave most often just die but the second and third wave a build upon their artefacts and can be successful in a longer run? I see this coming for sure for open ai and I do my part by just writing this comment on HN.

Yes, "the pioneers get all the arrows".

From a business point of view, you don't want to be first to market. You want to be the second or third.

Post reply on HN