1 - are you planning to let people write their own prompts?

2 - when will you share the model names?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35908694

Points: 13

# Comments: 1

Google is a behemoth with multiple products and a lot of people with opinions who you have to get through to launch a product.

Also, OpenAI has not unseated Google's dominance in search nor do I see this happening.

It's propietary company evaluation data, and it's for a specific domain related to software development, a domain that OpenAI is actively attempting to improve performance for.

Anyways enjoy your evening. If you want to actually have a reasonable discussion without being unpleasant I'd be happy to discuss further.

The OP's post was saying it's somehow able to solve something new. It's showing a severe misunderstanding how how language modelling works.

None of the papers or blogs you've shared offer any points that actually rebutt what I'm saying.

And yes, we will eventually have them work in real time. Can't wait.

Your post says nothing of substance because it offers no substantial rebuttal and seems to just attack a position by creating a hand-waved argument without any clear understanding of how parameters in-fact impact a model's outputs.

You also completely missed my point.

It's clear that whatever tests he writes cover well established and understood concepts.

This is where I believe people are missing the point. GPT4 is not a general intelligence. It is a highly overfit model, but it's overfit to literally every piece of human knowledge.

Language is humanities way of modelling real world concepts. So GPT is able to leverage the relationships we create through our language to real world concepts. It's just learned all language up until today.

It's an incredible knowledge retrieval machine. It can even mimick how our language is used to conduct reasoning very well.

It can't do this efficiently, nor can it actually stumble upon a new insight because it's not being exposed in real time to the real world.

So, this professors 'new' test is not really new. It's just a test that fundamentally has already been modelled.

I'm wondering if there is a way to become a part of something ground breaking like neurobiological research instead?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35469987

Points: 1

# Comments: 1

There's no moat anymore. Building some dumb webapp to sell to people to make their lives marginally more convenient is not sustainable model.

So what do you do now? Seems like the only option is to move towards a life and death industry.

But when everyone does this, it's game over.

The majority of the software industry is in a lot of trouble and honestly given that it was one of the highest paying industries that's not great for the economy.

What are people supposed to even do? What's next for all these displaced workers?

I feel like my options are to try a pivot towards non-generative CV or IoT/Forecasting/tabular data, but even those have mostly been commoditized.

I feel like your only shot of doing interesting work in software is to get into a group working on a foundational problem that's high risk.

Otherwise I think this field is on a slow death march. I don't think we will recover this bubble and achieve a ridiculous job market ever again. Companies are all getting wise to what GPT4 can do, and GPT5 is coming within the year.

Honestly progress is great, but humans are getting left behind. That's fine I guess, I just want to be able to plan for it and adjust.

Is anyone else just done?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35399757

Points: 2

# Comments: 2

Presumably this worked because many tech based businesses were seen as massive high risk bets that were unproven. VCs were the primary source of funds and many relied heavily on leverage upstream.

Without low rates the VC based funding model will need to change, and companies may need to seek funding from more traditional sources where revenue matters much more upfront. This might mean premature optimization on business models leading to more moderate growth and less of a focus on hypergrowth and global scale.

Does this mean the hypergrowth era is over?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33685547

Points: 6

# Comments: 3

That's also usually how companies get displaced. I'm not sure we'll be driving any cars from established manufacturers if EVs gain wide adoption and reach a price level that's affordable to the average person.

I do agree that Tesla's entire value is in their battery tech. Their 'premium' cars are actually about on par with Korean and Japanese mid-tier vehicles in terms of quality at best, by every objective measure. But their pricing is luxury level simply due to the cost of batteries.

The primary reason is quality control. The way these devices are tested can never truly represent the massive variation which would impact their ability to process and parse sound. For example, the wide range of accents for a language like English. The variations in ambient noise in real world environments etc.

Beyond that, generative language models have only recently become powerful, but they need server side processing which is incredibly expensive for the majority of contexts where an AI is useful. Think of call centers. I HATE when companies try to use voice AI in call centers, thinking it's a good way to save money.

Bank Call Center Phone Cal example:

Voice AI: "tell me, how can I help?" Me: "I'd like to request my final statements for a recently closed account." Voice AI: "I'm not sure I heard that correctly" Me: "Statements for a closed account" Voice AI: "Do you want to close an account?" Me: "Statements" Voice AI: "I'm not sure I can help with that, let me get you to a customer care representative. Please enter or say your 16 digit account number"

What was the point of that? The vast majority of customers know how to use online banking to get information at this point. Why did you make me do this? And then, imagine I get disconnected and need to call back. Go through the same process again. The bank may have saved some money (questionable, as they have already outsourced the call center anyway to somewhere cheap), but they've irked me so much, I'm always ready to switch. To bad all banks are the same where I live.

Point being, the tech is too premature, unfinished and hard to build and it offers questionable value.

Voice AI is mostly useful in situations where I need to be handsfree. I think what SoundHound is doing makes the most sense. Sell your Voice AI as an API to manufacturers who build good quality speakers.

Everything else is pointless right now.