Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49457869

Points: 9

# Comments: 1

I think what's more likely the culprit is the desperation to claim ground. They (and many others) want to rush out an answer to all of AI's new challenges out of fear of being beaten to the punch.

It usually leads to a complex, almost incoherent product suite.

https://youtube.com/shorts/igfP5CQAkHU?is=TJqk4lxxhYkK8hQV

I personally think more open models are a good thing regardless of motive.

The challenge is to find ways to catch criminals without trampling all over individual rights. This isn't that solution. It's too readily abused.

At the risk of sounding AI pilled, I find LLM's are fairly good sparring partners if you instruct them well. At least they're more capable of giving you the best arguments against your position than the average bar patron.

Almost all of my non-professional prompts are of that nature.

Their homepage:

Free email isn’t really free: you’re paying with your privacy. As a paid service, we only serve you, our customer. This means we have no split loyalties, no mining of your personal data, no sharing it with third parties, and no ads, ever.

So I really don't know how much I take.

I drive around the NY metropolitan area a lot. No, I don't want to take the route that saves a few minutes if it involves merging onto I95 at rush hour with 300 feet to cross 4 lanes of traffic for the next exit.

Microsoft was an early large investor in OpenAI. They get priority access to the models, and can use them in their products for the next 8 years as a result. They still use OAI for most (Copilot etc), but incorporate others these days as well. Not open source like you suggest AFAIK, but their own proprietary models.

OpenAI builds and serves their models on Azure (partly), and pays MSFT to do so. This used to be a contractual obligation, but no longer is. This article is about just how important that payment is/was to MSFT's AI business, implying it would be devastating if OpenAI chose to wind down their Azure spend and go with another provider.

That's my understanding of the situation.

"it shows that GPU and infrastructure consumption specifically from OpenAI still drives between 65 to 70% of Microsoft's total AI business"

They quote a study in which developers report to spend 11-14% of their day coding. The rest is stuff like solution design and meetings. The insinuation is that AI can at most automate 14% of your day.

The problem with this argument is that once you have code, some (not all) of the precursors to code go away.

Congress can and does ask companies for their expertise/stance on any given issue or policy, for free. They want to be involved for the same reason they lobby.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/ccFwBoDZMrmK7Bvc6?g_st=ac

Just surrounded by dust.