this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
487 points (96.2% liked)
Technology
59217 readers
2825 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
For perspective, global annual GDP is $105 trillion, which means Altman is asking the world to invest 6.7% or so of the entire world's economic output for one year in his company.
Holy fucking bonkers when you put it that way. Like holy fuck.
Are they that close to something amazing, or is Altman going true Dr Evil megalomaniac?
It's both. Basically, if he's right that this is among the most important tech in world history and deserves $7 trillion in research, it'll make OpenAI the du jour monopolist over said most important tech in world history if he gets it. Outright dystopian.
Generative AI is not an important development. General AI would be. This is just a party trick.
Yeah, AI's been a whole field for many decades, machine learning and deep learning is a whole field that existed and was doing tons of interesting work across a variety of domains before transformers came out. Fully agreed that LLM's are a party trick, but companies use party tricks to gin up interest and money for their real work all the time. None of this changes the fact that AI is important technology.
It's also open source too. With faster chips and standard training sets, it will be trivial for anyone to train a basic AI to recognize fire hydrants or whatever. Just like with computers, the "revolution" will not be one giant company but every business using their own.
Your fridge only needs to recognize food items. It doesn't need any more intelligent software. I want a food recognition AI and cameras in the fridge and cabinets so I know what food I need to buy. This doesn't even need live cameras (for power consumption, privacy, and storage). It can just take a picture and analyze it when the door opens, then delete the picture.
Sorry what's all open source?
Llms. There are very competitive, fully open source models.
Openai is not.
They’re bullshit. Any breakthrough in General AI world be news everywhere forever.
Aside from the fact that OpenAI and Microsoft leak like a sieve, the scramble for investors would publicize the development, and also the fact that Altman is a braggadocious idiot who need everyone to think he’s smart or he’ll collapse in on himself. The world would know, there isn’t an argument to the contrary that holds any water given the scale of the breakthrough general AI would be and the actors involved here.
The breakthrough was the ability to do like 3rd grade math. Being able to reason is a big step to researchers but it’s still very much in the research phase.
Generative AI pales in importance compared to General AI but it is still an important development on its own.
Read the last paragraph of the OP at least. This is not asking for $5 trillion to be handed solely to OpenAI to go become a world monopoly on chip manufacture. What he’s really asking is for investors to direct funds to radically increasing world compute capacity, to the profit for the chip manufacturers and likely many others. OpenAI just gets to continue the track it’s on without this constraint. There is nothing here about them monopolistically controlling this entire investment and in fact the opposite is true: it’s framed as a broad partnership venture.
They're as close as theranos was, just need the money and "two more years".
theranos never changed the world, openai already has
Eh, not really in a positive way yet. I use it for quick code snippets but it’s not all that important compared to the fact that misuse of generative A.I. is making so much information on the Internet completely worthless. I don’t think the trade-offs have been worth anything we’ve seen yet.
I’m bullish about a lot of generative A.I. use cases long term but they haven’t accomplished much positive yet and there’s still major, major scaling issues that may not be solved soon. It could easily be like self driving cars where progress stagnates. A lot of times with software, the first 80% is easy and the last 20% takes a decade longer than people expect.
To be fair we have scare articles galore every day about how this is all ruining the world and killing artists, because fear sells. Meanwhile millions of people like you and me are quietly using this tool to improve our work.
When we compare the relative weight of the two, let’s take the media scare avalanche out of it and just use our personal experiences to judge. I am currently being measurably helped by genAI, and not measurably hurt by it. I just read articles daily about how I’m going to be killed in my sleep by in any second now…
That change has mostly br a bunch of empty promises. There is no AI yet, there is machine learning, which is just an ingredient. As impressive as they are, they're mostly useless
Machine learning is AI
I don't know if creating and tying yourself to a bubble that's inevitably going to burst is exactly a great way to change the world.
It's a great way to make a fat pile of cash though.
It may not be bonkers at all though. If we look at it as taking money and food out of people’s mouths for a year then yes it’s a lot. But how much free investment capital is there in the world at any given time? Wealth has been accumulating and accumulating in rich people’s investment portfolios for ever and ever. How many Trillions get allocated in any given year? All Altman is saying is that he wants 5 of those to be allocated here and not somewhere else. It’s not necessarily taking rice out of any children’s mouths.
"Ahh fuck it. Let's just hijack a nuclear weapon and hold the world hostage."
These days Dr. Evil would still get laughed at for demanding the $100 billion.
For being too high or being too low, like when he asked for a million dollars?
For being too low.
They are that close to cocaine.
Ye and he wants it for a fucking chatbot.
And the world's 5 biggest companies their total market cap is a bit over 8 trillion dollars, which is also mind boggling, that so much capital is concentrated in the hands of so few people or shall we say mega corporations.
Came here to say this. Does she know how much money there is in the world? He is asking for basically 1/20th of all the money in the world. Even if that was possible it would be dangerous for one company to hold that much.
Money can be created by banks via loans, you can just make it up.
But then you end up with inflation. So in the process of creating money you've reduced the value of the money. And banks working in cooperation with government create money. Private companies outside of the banking system can't create their own money anymore. If any sizable portion of this is taken out as a loan. It creates a systemic risk for the world economy.
Banks most certainly make up money today via loans. This happens all the time.
But this isn't a bank. And making money doesn't come without consequences. You're not thinking about second and third order effects. This would basically be quantitative easing on a grand scale but for just one company. It would literally destroy the economy if the investment failed. And they aren't the only player in the industry. The level of systemic risk is too large. And if it didn't fail, it would basically be handing the world economy over to one player.