Technology

Yeah where the hell do these posters find these articles anyway? It's always from blogs that repost stuff from somewhere else

MS is basically getting a ton of equity in exchange for cloud credits. That's a ridiculously good deal for MS.

Microsoft reported profitability in their AI products last quarter, with a substantial gain in revenue from it.

It won't take long for them to recoup their investment in OpenAI.

If OpenAI has been more responsible in how they released ChatGPT, they wouldn't be facing this problem. Just completely opening Pandora's box because they were racing to beat everyone else out was extremely irresponsible and if they go bankrupt because of it then whatever.

There's plenty of money to be made in AI without everyone just fighting over how to do it in the most dangerous way possible.

I'm also not sure nVidia is making the right decision trying their company to AI hardware. Sure, they're making mad money right now, but just like the crypto space that can dry up instantly.

So they'll raise the cost by $100/yr.

As a Sr. Dev, I'm always floored by stories of people trying to integrate chatGPT into their development workflow.

It's not a truth machine. It has no conception of correctness. It's designed to make responses that look correct.

Would you hire a dev with no comprehension of the task, who can not reliably communicate what their code does, can not be tasked with finding and fixing their own bugs, is incapable of having accountibility, can not be reliably coached, is often wrong and refuses to accept or admit it, can not comprehend PR feedback, and who requires significantly greater scrutiny of their work because it is by explicit design created to look correct?

ChatGPT is by pretty much every metric the exact opposite of what I want from a dev in an enterprise development setting.

In this case, Microsoft owns 49% of OpenAI, so they're the ones subsidizing it. They can also offer at-cost hosting and in-roads into enterprise sales. Probably a better deal at this point than VC cash.

This is what caused spez at Reddit and Musk at Twitter to go into desperation mode and start flipping tables over. Their investors are starting to want results now, not sometime in the distant future.

All it's every done is rob from it's employees so it can give money to stockholders. Just like every corporation.

Really says something that none of your responses yet seem to have caught that this was a joke.

It's shit on because it is not actually AI as the general public tends to use the term. This isn't Data from Star Trek, or anything even approaching Asimov's three laws.

The immediate defense against this statement is people going into mental gymnastics and hand waving about "well we don't have a formal definition for intelligence so you can't say they aren't" which is just... nonsense rhetorically because the inverse would be true as well. Can't label something as intelligent if we have no formal definition either. Or they point at various arbitrary tests that ChatGPT has passed and claim that clearly something without intelligence could never have passed the bar exam, in complete and utter ignorance of how LLMs are suited to those types of problem domains.

Also, I find that anyone bringing up the limitations and dangers is immediately lumped into this "AI haters" group like belief in AI is some sort of black and white religion or requires some sort of idealogical purity. Like having honest conversations about these systems' problems intrinsically means you want them to fail. That's BS.

Machine Learning and Large Language Models are amazing, they're game changing, but they aren't magical panaceas and they aren't even an approximation of intelligence despite appearances. LLMs are especially dangerous because of how intelligent they appear to a layperson, which is why we see everyone rushing to apply them to entirely non-fitting use cases as a race to be the first to make the appearance of success and suck down those juicy VC bux.

Anyone trying to say different isn't familiar with the field or is trying to sell you something. It's the classic case of the difference between tech developers/workers and tech news outlets/enthusiasts.

The frustrating part is that people caught up in the hype train of AI will say the same thing: "You just don't understand!" But then they'll start citing the unproven potential future that is being bandied around by people who want to keep you reading their publication or who want to sell you something, not any technical details of how these (amazing) tools function.

At least in my opinion that's where the negativity comes from.