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

861–870 of 915 posts

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

#861

Post by freejazz »

AntiUSAbah wrote: post #796
freejazz wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah and every year before there was another poster telling me the next model iteration would be enough.

The problem here is the adoption curve; Right now it might feel to you that its not worth it or not happening as it might for most people. Than suddenly one model update moves it from 80% to 85% and now 30% of the market wants to use it. Then it might be already too late to act like using it to your advantage, being a valuable expert or deciding things long term based on the new state of affairs.

You're in denial and this is cope. The tools aren't even close. The notion that any model is 5% away from doing what has been promised *FOR YEARS* is just facially ridiculous.

>Then it might be already too late to act like using it to your advantage, being a valuable expert or deciding things long term based on the new state of affairs.

There's no universe where this is happening. The tools just are not that good. It's been years of folks like you telling me my job will disappear, but the only thing that this has demonstrated is that the vast majority programmers have *NO IDEA* what other people actually do for a living and how they do it.

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

#863

Post by Forgeties79 »

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”

> they are wildly successful by absolutely any measure

Except revenue. Not one company is in the black. That’s a pretty important measure you’re ignoring.

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

#864

Post by everforward »

willy_k wrote: post #827
everforward wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is sane washing their idea in the modern context of it having failed. I think at the time, they thought VR would be the next big thing and wanted to become the dominant player via first mover advantage. The headsets don’t really make sense to me in the way you’re describing. Phones are omnipresent because it’s a thing you always just have on you. Headsets are large enough that it’s a conscious choice to…

It’s premature to say that the idea failed; The flashy controversial “metaverse” angle where you can live your whole life on the Quest or whatever isn’t happening, but their investment into AR/VR has definitely started to show real payoff potential with their glasses. They address the friction of use issue being discussed, they’re even more discrete and available than a phone. And they are getting a lot of general pu…

I don’t mean that VR failed entirely, just that the metaverse as a concept is basically dead. VR will live on in the niches where it makes sense.

If you’re talking about the Meta Ray Ban glasses, I wouldn’t really call that a successor. There’s no AR or VR to them that I can tell; just glasses with speakers, a mic and a camera. It’s a neat product, but not a platform in the way VR was meant to be. They also have real competition. I do actually own a pair of the Bose headphone sunglasses, which are practically the same product without a camera (which I’m sure they could add if they wanted). Unless people suddenly care about the Meta AI integration, and again; Bose or someone else could add a phone companion app.

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

#865

Post by everforward »

ynx wrote: post #842
everforward wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is sane washing their idea in the modern context of it having failed. I think at the time, they thought VR would be the next big thing and wanted to become the dominant player via first mover advantage. The headsets don’t really make sense to me in the way you’re describing. Phones are omnipresent because it’s a thing you always just have on you. Headsets are large enough that it’s a conscious choice to…

As someone who was there: nope. This isn't sanewashing. Apple was directly (and IMO arguably illegally) shutting down Facebook teams and products by playing app store chicken on refusing to allow Facebook to publish updates on a week-to-week basis. Literally would throw down and refuse unless some features were blocked. It came to a head where Zuck literally called Tim Cook during a keynote to push it through. They a…

> we discovered because of some internal methods we figured out how to invoke with some clever indirection.

Apple trying to block Facebook is different than Apple trying to prevent Facebook from violating App Store standards. There was a time where the Facebook app was practically malware with all the tricks it tried to pull to Hoover up data.

I don’t know in what world I would describe Metas VR as anything but a failure. There was a brief period where I knew a few people with Quests. Most used them for the novelty and dropped them, a few played games on them, and I don’t know anyone that still owns one. I’m deep in the gaming community and haven’t heard anyone mention a Quest in years. Steam VR is almost equally quiet other than occasional nostalgia.

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

#866

Post by unixhero »

timssopomo wrote: post #845
fnord123 wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they are based on [the west coast of the US]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_frontier ). DeepSeek, Z.ai, Moonhsot, and Mistral are never called frontier because they aren't based in California.

Outside of California they're sparkling ai labs.

I am supposed to say we are using these sparkle models then?

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

#867

Post by goosejuice »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #700
goosejuice wrote: post #696

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47454647

That's both niche and for kids too young to have a facebook account in the first place.

It is, but it's part of a larger trend of buying dumbphones amongst the younger generations.

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

#869

Post by dwaltrip »

unixhero wrote: post #839
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.

Why is it called frontier and why is it called a frontier ai lab?

It’s like “cutting edge”. A metaphor for the newest and best.

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

#870

Post by dwaltrip »

fnord123 wrote: post #844
unixhero wrote: post #839

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it called frontier and why is it called a frontier ai lab?

Because they are based on [the west coast of the US]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_frontier ). DeepSeek, Z.ai, Moonhsot, and Mistral are never called frontier because they aren't based in California.

Huh, interesting. History casts a long shadow.
Post reply on HN