Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
801–810 of 915 posts
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#802Elon once said OpenAI will eat microsoft alive
Partners with OpenAI then builds 4 products that compete with each other, runs out of compute despite owning datacenters and having infinite cash, then deploys it all in a way that makes people hate them (Copilot)
And now they are out of chips
That's always the moto with Microslop, buy what's good, established and liked by everyone, to then turn it to shit
History repeats itself, this company should be dismantled
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#803A wise man from Google said in an internal memo to the tune of: "We do not have any moat neither does anyone else." Deepseek v4 is good enough, really really good given the price it is offered at. PS: Just to be clear - even the most expensive AI models are unreliable, would make stupid mistakes and their code output MUST be reviewed carefully so Deepseek v4 is not any different either, it too is just a random token…
PS: Just to be clear - even the most expensive humans are unreliable, would make stupid mistakes, and their output MUST be reviewed carefully, so you’re not any different either. You’re just a random next-thought generator based on neuron firing distributions with no real thought process, trained on a few billion years of evolution like all other humans.
For e.g. ask any model "which class of problems and domains do you have a high error rate in?".
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#804Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
#805Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is somewhat out of date (Dec 2024), but gives you some idea of how far behind AMD was then: https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/mi300x-vs-h100-vs-h200... Pull quotes: AMD’s software experience is riddled with bugs rendering out of the box training with AMD is impossible. We were hopeful that AMD could emerge as a strong competitor to NVIDIA in training workloads, but, as of today, this is unfortunately not the…
Anecdotal but over several years with an AMD GPU in my desktop I've tried multiple times to do real AI work and given up every time with the AMD stack.
ROCm works great too, the only issue i have had is that my machine froze a couple of times as it used 100% of the graphics and the OS had nothing left. Since moving to vulcan i stopped getting these errors apart from a little UI slowdown when i had 4 models loaded at the same time taking turns.
Im also on a i7 6700 with 32gb DDR4 so im sure that is causing more slowdowns then the graphics card.
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#806As former corporate restructuring lawyer…this kind of stuff indicates the cash strapped scramble of the end days.
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#807Microsoft and OpenAI quietly killed the AGI clause. The provision that decided what happens when OpenAI builds human-level intelligence, gone. Six months ago that was the most important sentence in tech. Now it's a footnote in a revenu restructuring. Tells you everything about where the AGI conversation actually is.
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#808As former corporate restructuring lawyer…this kind of stuff indicates the cash strapped scramble of the end days.
Can you elaborate?
Same with a few other steps we are seeing them take.
It all looks fine until it doesn’t. Once the cash crunch hits. It’s too late
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#809Earlier 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.
You need to understand history for this. It's because of the famous "Bezos API mandate memo" https://chrislaing.net/blog/the-memo/ . It was 2002, nobody was doing anything close to that. You could argue now that that's no excuse anymore given it's one of the most valuable companies in the world, but that would dismiss the fact they have other priorities than a complete UI overhaul for consistency, and that rewrites a…
But as a customer I absolutely hate working with AWS tech. Their stuff is a mess and I feel like I shouldn't have to get my head around their idiosyncracies. I prefer Azure even though Microsoft is a terrible company to work with. I find the AWS people and attitude a lot nicer but their services are a mess. If I do something new I prefer using Azure despite having to work with Microsoft.
Microsoft is not a "trusted partner" wanting the best for you, they're always trying to screw you over in favour of selling some new crap to your boss. Always that stupid sales drive, whereas the people from AWS are very focused on building success together. But still, their tech is just so bad unless you spend all your days working with it and really become an expert on what they offer. That's not tech, just corporate servitude. And I've always avoid that position, I don't want my career tied to some big brand name. I don't want to be "the AWS expert" or "the MS expert".
But I have to say I hate cloud (and "the world according to big tech") in general, and it's one of the reasons I'm not really involved in server infrastructure anymore these days. I'll gladly automate but not with their tooling, I prefer something more open and not tied to specific vendors. But I rarely work with that now. So yeah when that happens I'm making a one-off unicorn and figuring out all the Infra as code stuff is not worth it.
Re: Microsoft and OpenAI end their exclusive and revenue-sharing deal
#810Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are calling something “magic” that actually happened in real life.
You were misrepresenting what actually happened b/c you want to believe in magic. I'm not calling it magic, I'm saying your interpretation of events is magical b/c you don't actually understand how computers work. There is nothing magical about theorem proving, Isabelle/HOL has been doing it for decades.