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

851–860 of 915 posts

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

#851

Post by coredog64 »

_vertigo wrote: post #723
nl wrote: post #679

Earlier 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This is somewhat out of date (Dec 2024), but gives you some idea of how far behind AMD was then: https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/mi300x-vs-h100-vs-h200...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…

That’s insane. There should be a big team of people at AMD whose whole job is just to dogfood their stuff for training like this. Speaking of which, Amazon is in the same boat, I’m constantly surprised that Amazon is not treating improving Inferentia/Trainium software as an uber-priority. (I work at Amazon)

Where's the scope for an L7 promo in "Fixed a bunch of tiny issues that were making it hard to use Tranium/Inferentia with PyTorch"?

Amazon's compensation strategy, in which you primarily get a raise years in the future for tricking your management chain into promoting you is definitely bearing its rotten fruit.

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

#852

Post by timacles »

everforward wrote: post #662
Aerroon wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think headsets might work, but I think Meta trying to use their first mover advantage so hard so early backfired. Oculus, as a device, became less desirable after it required Facebook integration. It's kind of like Microsoft with copilot - the idea about having an AI assistant that can help you use the computer is great. But it can't be from Microsoft because people don't trust them with that.

Interaction feels like the issue with headsets. You either need a fair bit of space for gesture controls, or you have to talk to yourself for voice control. I think VR has more niche uses than the craze implied. It’s got some cool games, virtual screens for a desktop could be cool someday, but I don’t see a near future where they replace phones.

People are discounting the fact the almost no one wants a contraption on their head for an extended period of time. It is a universal preference

Until VR is done via glasses or some wire you stick in your neck matrix style, it will never take off

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

#853

Post by gchamonlive »

wolvoleo wrote: post #809
gchamonlive wrote: post #794

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I understand how this came to pass (I didn't know it before so thanks for the insight!) 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…

I'm right there with you, don't get me wrong. Choosing a cloud provider is like choosing the lesser of many evils. We are, however, coming to a point where k8s is viable for most workloads, so it's less complex today to spin up a project with cloud mobility in mind than it was 10 years ago if you plan it right.

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

#854

Post by mlmonkey »

coder-3 wrote: post #606
mattnewton wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

This is what I've heard on the "street". Building a CUDA-compatible stack for AMD's hardware requires highly-paid SWEs. It's a very niche field, and talent is hard to come by.

But AMD does not want to pay these specialized SWEs the market rate. Their existing SWEs would be up in arms saying, basically, "what are we, chopped liver??", or so the thinking goes.

So AMD is stuck with a shitty software stack which cannot compete with CUDA.

If I were making such decisions, I would just cull the number of existing SWEs down by 50%, and double the pay for remaining ones. And then go out and hire some top talent to build a good software stack.

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

#855

Post by square_usual »

mlmonkey wrote: post #854
coder-3 wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

This is what I've heard on the "street". Building a CUDA-compatible stack for AMD's hardware requires highly-paid SWEs. It's a very niche field, and talent is hard to come by. But AMD does not want to pay these specialized SWEs the market rate. Their existing SWEs would be up in arms saying, basically, "what are we, chopped liver??", or so the thinking goes. So AMD is stuck with a shitty software stack which cannot c…

> highly-laid SWEs

Freudian slip?

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

#857

Post by [deleted] »

PKop wrote: post #531
eklavya wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem smart and knowledgeable. Maybe you should reach the lawyers at these companies and then they can change the policy!

No I think it's made up, there is no policy, and the lawyers couldn't care less, it's just something people do to massage their own ego.

[deleted]

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

#858

Post by csa »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #697
csa wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would they be speaking on behalf of their employers? Disclaimers aren’t there for folks who are thinking and acting rationally. They are there for people who are thinking irrationally and/or manipulatively. There are (relatively speaking) a lot of these people. They can chew up a lot of time and resources over what amounts to nothing. Disclaimers like this can give a legal department the upper hand in cases lik…

Sounds like the company in the latter example really screwed up, but how does that connect to disclaimers? Is it just an example of malicious behavior?

Great questions.

> Sounds like the company in the latter example really screwed up

Interesting. I think they made an unfortunate but sound decision based on their circumstances.

> but how does that connect to disclaimers?

It doesn’t directly.

> Is it just an example of malicious behavior?

Yes. It’s an example of how absolutely bat-shit crazy people can behave in ways that can tax a company’s legal team. Having folks use a disclaimer will almost certainly lighten some of this load in terms of defending against folks who weaponize online comments made by employees.

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

#859

Post by whatever1 »

hirako2000 wrote: post #430
solumunus wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They haven’t sold anything they’ve been diluted.

A company can dilute just like that?

Of course. Public companies do this too. Where do you think the stocks awards that they give to employees come from?

They come from just printing more shares every quarter, diluting every shareholder.

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

#860

Post by emp17344 »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #716
emp17344 wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don’t have agents that are able to work entirely autonomously, even in the coding realm, which is where they seem to be most valuable. In fact, they’re seemingly not even close to replacing software engineers.

Same can be said of many humans.

Say what you will about humans, but they are absolutely capable of working autonomously. That’s what jobs are.
Post reply on HN