33 ms·

Microsoft eyes $10B bet on ChatGPT

• fsloth 4y ago
  $10 Bilion for the non-ruling half of OpenAI? Impresssive. As a reference Microsoft paid $7.2 billion for the entire handset business of Nokia (which was floundering at the time, but still).
  • MuffinFlavored 4y ago
    What's the path to monetization for Microsoft for OpenAI/ChatGPT?
    • stonemetal12 4y ago
      The recent announcement of ChatGPT being used in Bing. Also wouldn't surprise me if GitHub Copilot moves to OpenAI, if it isn't already. The return of Clippy?
      • bleuchase 4y ago
        Copilot is already built on Codex, which was built by OpenAI https://openai.com/blog/openai-codex/ https://openai.com/blog/openai-codex/
    • cypress66 4y ago
      I would pay a monthly subscription for it.
      • sharemywin 4y ago
        To me the subscription model is the best for consumers but there's probably way more money in monetizing the responses with advertorials. Me: what's the best camera? "Don't have opinions but Canon XJ blah blah has blah and blah.. *Advertising why we can't have anything nice....
    • fleddr 4y ago
      Bundle into office and price hike the office bundle. Or don't price hike and attract new customers because competitors lack the deep integration.
      • fsloth 4y ago
        Absolutely. For example word provides templates for all sorts of documents and letters. Now they can add "please write the letter about X for me using this document template" feature. Guess how many letters of resignation Chat GPT will write in the future...
    • xen2xen1 4y ago
      Adding it to Bing could be an actual differentiator, which has been announced. MS also has a lot of speech tech, so making a search engine an actual spoken chat could possibly be huge. That's just for Bing.
      • paul7986 4y ago
        Yes but MS doesn't have a phone or and phone operating system. They could do deals with Apple like Google does to make it the primary search and or have Apple ask the user which engine they like to use on set up. There's a video on YouTube with a UK reporter having a 20 minute conversation with ChatGPT ..I wanted to use that but I guess it's a private app created by Open AI.
        • 93po 4y ago
          Bing search is absolutely shoved down the throats of Windows users and Edge users
      • MuffinFlavored 4y ago
        > Adding it to Bing could be an actual differentiator, which has been announced. For who? I'm not going to switch off of Google to Bing, are you? How would they get the word out to Google users to give Bing's new feature a try? Headlines like this? How many users will actually switch their daily search engine from Google to Bing due to this? 100k?
        • xen2xen1 4y ago
          Ryan Reynolds. Just put Ryan Reynolds on Twitter, TV, and a few Facebook ads, and everyone will know. And yes, there are lots of people that could switch if it actually gave you an answer. At least it's significantly new, and a possible successor to text search. No, I would not change, but I read HN, I am not the mass market they are looking for. Oddly enough, the use I find most compelling would be Cortana, or Siri, or Google Assistant. If you could suddenly make them not dumb, then that would be very, very different. I'll bet the most likely place this ends up is Office. They already have an app like Stable Diffusion, I'll bet the voice reading on Outlook for emails will turn into a chat, or some such. Then you can add an actual conversation from there "would you like to schedule a meeting" and so on. "Would you like to add a contact? Ok, would you like to have me check for a business or personal address for them?". Cortana still exists for Office and Windows, IIRC.
    • nprateem 4y ago
      It's probably a strategic investment to prevent competitors getting in there instead.
    • modo_mario 4y ago
      Aside from integration in bing and whatnot the article states: "It is reported that Microsoft’s investment includes a rather peculiar agreement. The organization would receive 75% of OpenAI’s income until it has recovered its initial investment."
      • MuffinFlavored 4y ago
        I guess I'm not a believer in "Microsoft will make it so the Bing search engine returns a hybrid of ChatGPT answers + scraped web pages and therefore more people will use Bing instead of Google and therefore Bing ad revenue will go up"
    • frabcus 4y ago
      API revenue so far (somebody has to be upstream provider to all the UIs to make AI marketing spam), gives them an advantage over AWS, although I’m sceptical they’ll keep it for long.
• fleddr 4y ago
  Office + ChatGPT is coming, as in...integrated. Think about what that means for writing (and reading!) emails. Powerpoint slides. Internal Wikis. The ability for enterprises to do custom training based on their own data.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • orra 4y ago
    > Office + ChatGPT is coming, as in...integrated. Mmm! Perhaps finally delivering on the dream Clippy aspired to.
• verdenti 4y ago
  I guess monetizing chatGPT should be simple, I would pay a monthly subscription for it in a heartbeat. Are there any competitors at this point that can match its performance? How hard would it be to replicate?
  • fnordpiglet 4y ago
    That’s my question - is it that it’s a huge advance that’s revolutionary or is it an incremental innovation that can be replicated from current state of the art with some effort.
    • lossolo 4y ago
      It can be replicated, it's basically clever fine-tuning of GPT-3 with human assistance. Google has model that can do what ChatGPT can for some time already.
  • georgehill 4y ago
    I've been noticing Claude(AnthropicAI’s new model), seems to be matching the performance of ChatGPT https://twitter.com/goodside/status/1611622200573829121 https://twitter.com/goodside/status/1611622200573829121
  • summerlight 4y ago
    I had a chance to use LAMDA a few times. In my experience, LAMDA produces a slightly better outcome (less BS basically) but not a fundamentally different level. I guess MS won't be the only player in the league.
  • testmasterflex 4y ago
    What do you use it for exactly?
    • alar44 4y ago
      Not parent, but basic scripts and programming, debugging, error codes, outlines for emails, reports, dry documents, code translation, brainstorming, explaining code snippets, playing fake text adventure games, creating lists, and on and on. Anyone saying GPT isn't useful because it's not Wikipedia or right 100% of the time are completely missing the mark and imo, is not able to think outside the box. It's insanely useful.
• sparrc 4y ago
  AWS and GCP execs must be kicking themselves wondering how this one got away. Azure appears to be years ahead in offering usable AI models to cloud customers.
  • buzzdenver 4y ago
    ChatGPT Caused 'Code Red' at Google: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/chatgpt-caused-code-red-at-google-report-says/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/chatgpt-caus...
    • decremental 4y ago
      I'd bet not just from a technical standpoint. I'm sure many people started playing with ChatGPT and were like maybe Google isn't so amazing and high tech after all. They look like ancient tech compared to ChatGPT. It's a brand image problem now too. Google: dinosaur tech that exists only to gather information about you and serve you ads.
      • fullsend 4y ago
        The brand in general is incredibly weak now. When I use Google it feels cluttered with ads and useless results. Using GPT was such a relief. I use it 75% versus Google 25% for data science hobby projects.
        • visarga 4y ago
          Google, the new AltaVista
          • doctor_eval 4y ago
            Between your mention of AltaVista and that thread on amber monitors, I’m really feeling my age.
        • xnx 4y ago
          "incredibly weak" = #7 on the list of "Most Admired Companies"? https://fortune.com/ranking/worlds-most-admired-companies/ https://fortune.com/ranking/worlds-most-admired-companies/
• warning26 4y ago
  It’s really impressive watching OpenAI go from “no one can use this model because it’s too dangerous” to “everyone can use the model online but you can’t have the model because we’re selling it to Microsoft for billions of dollars.”
  • fnordpiglet 4y ago
    By impressive I assume you mean predictable? When the government comes with a huge CIA check it’ll be impressive watching too.
  • fullsend 4y ago
    All of the Altman/Graham clique talk a big game but are simps for big money and power at the end of the day. Like many of us.
  • wyldfire 4y ago
    What is their sincere interpretation of "Open" in "OpenAI"? Their models are not distributed publicly, correct? Do they describe the network characteristics and training data openly? Where's the "open" part? EDIT: I just read their charter and it describes "benefit of humanity" (laudable if feasible for them to deliver on it) but nothing about openness.
    • ndiddy 4y ago
      you can open your wallet and give them money
    • shmageggy 4y ago
      Pure historical legacy. Today they are Open to all monetization avenues.
    • ilaksh 4y ago
      It was always just marketing.
    • godelski 4y ago
      > Where's the "open" part? HuggingFace
• hgarg 4y ago
  Everything in that article seems made up.
  • fnordpiglet 4y ago
    Such as? I didn’t see anything that seemed unlikely to be true. I’m curious what makes your read so different but you left off any substantiating details.
  • ilaksh 4y ago
    Well so do most things in the news these days if you haven't been paying attention.
• sslayer 4y ago
  I predict ChatGPT is the next Self driving Tesla tech.
  • outside1234 4y ago
    Seriously - it’s the 85% correct solution that gets you killed in the other 15%
    • space_fountain 4y ago
      Well but it doesn’t kill you when it’s wrong so being 85% right is a lot more valuable
    • fnordpiglet 4y ago
      On the roughly 100 autopilot trips I’ve taken - you nailed it - I died 15 times.
      • lossolo 4y ago
        It's not about 100 easy autopilot trips, it's about 1001 trip where you as human can easily see what to do but AI will interpret reality wrong because it was not trained to handle that edge case and you will die.
        • omgwtfbyobbq 4y ago
          That's why everything except for TACC is in beta, the driver needs to agree to be ready to take control immediately before their use, and so on.
        • fnordpiglet 4y ago
          That sounds more like 99.9% not 85%. Guess it’s a good thing I don’t nap while it’s on.
      • mtnGoat 4y ago
        I think this is called survivor bias?
• georgehill 4y ago
  >After that threshold is reached, it would revert to a structure that reflects ownership of OpenAI, with Microsoft having a 49% stake, other investors taking another 49% and OpenAI’s nonprofit parent getting 2%. I am not a legal person, I am just confused with the deal structure. So, the OpenAI core team will own only 2% of the company?
• fintechjock 4y ago
  Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is a big bet on a company that just had their lunch eaten on another product by open source, no? Didn’t see much of Dall-E after Stable Diffusion release
  • ghilston 4y ago
    It would be incredible if a chat gpt competitor came into the self host able, open source, niche like stable diffusion. The options I've seen today are no where near as good as chat gpt
  • mustacheemperor 4y ago
    There are open source / OS model-based projects competing with OpenAI’s text generation. At least one, NovelAI, also has a Stable Diffusion fork incorporated into their paid product. At least so far none of them are close to what’s been achieved with ChatGPT, and that could in itself be driving some of the hype. ChatGPT was probably more impressive to me on the first impression being familiar with the limitations of existing AI text gen projects.
    • lossolo 4y ago
      I think the problem is time. To replicate the OpenAI RLHF architecture, they need their own high-quality dataset, which takes time to create. Without details about the hyperparameters, RL architecture, and omitted steps, they need to test a lot of things, which takes time and money. It requires more resources than it took SD to replicate DALL-E 2, which took months and was an easier task.
      • visarga 4y ago
        Check out Constitutional AI from Anthropic. They automated "RLHF" by simply writing a few rules.
        • lossolo 4y ago
          Thanks, just skimmed the paper, I think that "they automated RLHF" statement is maybe too strong here, there is still manual process but it seems like they optimized away a lot of manual labeling work.
• sillysaurusx 4y ago
  pg deserves a lot of credit for predicting this a decade ago: http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html > The way to win here is to build the search engine all the hackers use. A search engine whose users consisted of the top 10,000 hackers and no one else would be in a very powerful position despite its small size, just as Google was when it was that search engine. And for the first time in over a decade the idea of switching seems thinkable to me. > Since anyone capable of starting this company is one of those 10,000 hackers, the route is at least straightforward: make the search engine you yourself want. Feel free to make it excessively hackerish. Make it really good for code search, for example. Would you like search queries to be Turing complete? Anything that gets you those 10,000 users is ipso facto good. Whether by accident or by design, OpenAI did exactly that. And it all came down to them doing a little contract work for GitHub, in which OpenAI were the recipient of terabytes of code. What a turn. Imagine if Microsoft becomes the new Google.
  • gkoberger 4y ago
    If we're giving pg credit for calling things over decade ago, look at #5 on this list behind Steve Jobs, Larry and Sergey: http://www.paulgraham.com/5founders.html http://www.paulgraham.com/5founders.html
    • vore 4y ago
      Didn't Sam Altman found the notorious retina-scanning cryptocurrency?
      • xiphias2 4y ago
        He failed super fast with it, that's a good thing.
  • potamic 4y ago
    If anything, ChatGPT will be for the masses. Programming as a skill has been commoditized a fair bit over the last decade and I believe the kind of hackers pg was talking about would actively eschew all forms of AI search.
• SoftTalker 4y ago
  I can't imagine using ChatGPT for anything, personally. As a society we have grown physically obese on high calorie, sugar-packed foods combined with a sedentary lifestyle. Seems like we're about to become mentally obese when we no longer have to use our minds read or write and can just be spoon-fed AI generated words, music, and video. We will become a society of fat, drooling simpletons sitting in recliners consuming endless entertainment plugged directly into our senses while an IV drips glucose into the nearest vein.
  • insanitybit 4y ago
    Some counterpoints. 1. People have been saying "this tech will make people stupid" for ages. And it's kind of true, but it's not clear that it's bad. Yes, when technology can do things we stop learning to do those things because it stops mattering. If it does still matter we would still learn. 2. I've had good conversations with ChatGPT. I didn't ask it to solve a problem, I asked it to describe algorithms, give me information about them, etc. It was a great tool. Instead of having to find a peer, catch them up, do the polite dance, schedule a call, etc, I can just say "Hey tell me about consensus algorithms. OK, tell me about some of the tradeoffs. Given this change in a data model, what changes in those tradeoffs?" Anyway, I think this doomer view is pretty unfounded.
    • alar44 4y ago
      I feel like the people who think ChatGPT is pointless, unusable, boring etc, don't really get it. If you need to know a hard fact, just Google it. GPT will tell you what to look for. For example, I needed to learn about Slack chatbots. I asked it what frameworks I should look into, then how to use a specific framework or API. "Write me some boilerplate code doing X in Y framework". It's gets you up and running in minutes. I'm exploring and learning other programming languages at a crazy rate because I can have it translate something I wrote. Or, "Hey, give me a demo C++ program that uses arrays, for loops, logical operators, and a simple class." "Great, now rewrite this in Node.js." Sure, it might make a mistake, but copy and paste your error code and 90% of the time it compiles. I highly encourage any skeptics to just sit for a couple days and try to get it to write code. Once you get the hang of what it can and can't do, it's immensely helpful. This is vacuum tubes to transistors paradigm changing shit.
• pupppet 4y ago
  Google and Microsoft want their web properties to be your final destination, not your gateway to everything else. To achieve this they’ll use tools that completely rely on user-generated content to give you exactly what you need so you don’t need to go anywhere else. Except now where’s the incentive to generate new content nobody will ever see. For all intents and purposes they’re orchestrating the end of the web.
  • yywwbbn 4y ago
    Do they? How does Google earn money then if nobody is willing to pay them for ads that link to their products? > give you exactly what you need so you don’t need to go anywhere else. For free? That seems a incredible altruistic…
• karpierz 4y ago
  I'm seeing a lot of responses that see ChatGPT replacing Google, and it's unclear to me how? It can replace queries like "what's the tallest mountain in France", but that's not really a profitable query for Google. Whereas it's unclear to me how it replaces "best vegetarian restaurants in Gastown". It can string together a coherent statement, but then I have to go search to see whether it actually recommended vegetarian restaurants and if they are in fact any good. At which point, I'm back to using a search engine. And yes, you could wire it to show related articles. At which point you've just recreated a local search index (with GPTChat providing the Google summary card), which you now have to: 1. Figure out how to solve SEO hacking for your model. 2. Update the model regularly with new information. Putting you in the exact same position as Google, minus twenty years of experience doing it.
  • Gh0stRAT 4y ago
    >It can replace queries like "what's the tallest mountain in France", but that's not really a profitable query for Google. Being able to answer unprofitable questions has value insofar as you become peoples' go-to search engine for more profitable queries. That being said, I agree the threat to Google is probably over-hyped. (simultaneously, the spectre of LLMs coming along and giving people a reason to visit a competitor is probably the biggest threat to Google in the past decade+)
  • fullsend 4y ago
    Have you used it? Start working on anything. Next time you go to Google how to do something, or want to name something, or want to convert formats, or a dozen other things, just ask GPT. Say “give me 5 cool names for this”. Any task. “Show me a garden plot given plants from this time of year.” “Tell me about different types of LLCs and the tradeoffs.” “This code isn’t working what’s wrong.” You’ll quickly be able to feel how it can do your work for you, or shortcut hours of digging through garbage blogs and ad-infested pages served by Google. Go read one of the Twitter threads with 100 different insane, mind blowing examples of use cases.
    • scottLobster 4y ago
      How about this softball question I just tried? Q: "What was the most energy efficient electric vehicle available in 2022?" A: I'm sorry, but I don't have any information about specific electric vehicles that will be available in 2022. In general, the most energy efficient electric vehicles are those that have a large battery pack and a powerful electric motor, which allows them to travel long distances on a single charge. Some of the most energy efficient electric vehicles on the market today include the Tesla Model S, the Nissan Leaf, and the Chevrolet Bolt. It is possible that even more efficient electric vehicles will be available in 2022, but I don't have any specific information about them. Yeah, mind blowing. I especially chuckle at "This code isn't working what's wrong". Maybe it can help with CS 101 homework and hobby projects. Even if I had permission to upload my company's code, that consists of hundreds of thousands of lines of Java, Python, Perl, C#, C++, and SQL that runs on wildfly server clusters and oracle databases, spread over dozens of repos, all knitted together with thousands of lines of build scripts and gitlab pipelines. Oh and its only partially documented. Oh and there are contractural requirements, so the program will have to understand the contracts and the accepted interpretations of the requirements before making recommendations. This thing is not going to solve even the relatively trivial error I fixed today because it wouldn't be visible from any syntactical analysis. It would have to have sophisticated understanding of the software architecture itself, and stand up a duplicate system and run specific tests to verify that the problem is what it is. It would also lack context as to program objectives, because the problem wasn't strictly a malfunction, it was a vestigial feature that was supposed to have been removed but was still erroneously being deployed and interfering with its replacement. And my company is hardly unique in that regard, nor is our codebase the largest. ChatGPT is a consumer demo; which is fine. But if I showed you a newer, faster, better speedboat would you be talking about how it's going to alter container shipping and naval warfare? Maybe this is the start of something huge, but we have no idea what the backend of this thing looks like to judge what its potential actually is. Everyone's just slapping their wildest AI sci-fi fantasies on it the same way every new harebrained green tech with an impressive CG render is going to save the world from climate change and Crypto is totally going to replace all traditional finance and even the dollar itself. A few months ago I literally had someone counter my argument against crypto with "but your argument doesn't account for FTX, they solve a lot of what you're pointing out!", another situation where people were projecting what they wanted to see onto a black box. Even rich people and companies with lots of money. Don't make the same mistake here, wait until it does something real.
• andrecarini 4y ago
  I don't quite get the appeal of replacing a search engine with ChatGPT. It's certainly useful for many use cases [1], but when you're searching for information you likely want some trust signals attached to that information. When you land on a website that aggregates information (Reddit, Wikipedia, Stack Overflow, et cetera) you have many signals on display that helps you evaluate the quality and trustworthiness: upvotes, comments, user history, edit history, community meta data, and the list goes on. When you ask a question to ChatGPT, you have no idea if it's complete fiction or not, and if you want to check you'll have to end up searching around anyways. Maybe ChatGPT could eventually stop generating false answers and have metadata attached to the answers it gives, but I wouldn't bet on it unless it grows into much more than just a language model. [1]: Assistive technologies, introducing the web to elderly/children, generating fiction, creative copy, ...
  • achow 4y ago
    One example which shows usefulness of 'ChatGPT style' search. I'm in the market for a new car but have a particular requirement about size of the vehicle (width, length) due to parking constraints at my location. Instead of going to Google, I went to ChatGPT and asked it to compare two different models in terms of size - these two were within my budget and style. The answer that came about was exactly that I was looking for; it felt like some family vehicle expert nicely, helpfully and with empathy explaining the size difference without throwing all mm/cm from the get-go. It started by saying something to the effect: Overall Model1 is slightly larger than Model2, but lengthwise it is more... (I don't remember how exactly it went and too lazy to regenerate the result and paste it here).
    • alvah 4y ago
      Was it factually correct or AI hallucination though? This seems like it would be important.
      • achow 4y ago
        It was correct.. was easily verifiable.
• pvg 4y ago
  Previous 900 comment chonkthread from last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34242193 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34242193
• berry_sortoro 4y ago
  [dead]
• TekMol 4y ago
  Does anybody else have the feeling "Microsoft is back"? With GitHub and OpenAI the have put their finger on two pretty significant new projects. What new things has Google come up with over the last 5 years?
  • Kukumber 4y ago
    How are they back when the only thing they manage to do is "pump money into already successful things" To me this is a sign they are no longer able to compete and are failing back, the only growth they expect is from acquisitions This is not looking good
    • TekMol 4y ago
      How does it matter if a company buys or builds new projects? Betting on the right things is a hugely valuable skill. See Android, Youtube, Instagram, Tesla ... All projects that someone believed in, bought them, put money in, and then they became huge.
      • YetAnotherNick 4y ago
        > See Android, Youtube, Instagram, Tesla All of the examples grew by 100x after being bought. Which of the Microsoft's acquisition grew by even 10x? Which of them even achieved breakeven in term of money spent?
      • LegitShady 4y ago
        >How does it matter if a company buys or builds new projects? How does it not matter? It's like convincing yourself that since you can order delivery food you're a chef. Being able to produce new ideas that appeal to people is the sought after skill Microsoft is literally paying for with money from their entrenched positions that are failing to make anything new and appealing. Buying things is a skill all companies have and Microsoft is not skilled for spending money to buy ideas they can't come up with
      • Kukumber 4y ago
        There is a difference between investing into a good idea to make it successful and investing into a good idea that is already successful It is called "Opportunism" "Look they are doing great things lately with AI", when they just pumped money into an already successful AI project That's a short term vision, a sign of lack of capabilities in a specific domain, "let's buy our way in, nobody gonna notice"
• doitLP 4y ago
  Great…now OpenAI will become Microsoft Cortana SkyNet ClosedAI. Somehow I doubt this will lead to a safe rollout of more and more advanced AI in the future.
  • nathanaldensr 4y ago
    Given that AI ethics is already a huge and growing problem, perhaps it's good that OpenAI's tech would be dismissed as just another tool for corporate control over our lives.
  • vouaobrasil 4y ago
    There is no scenario in which rolling out AI will be safe. As soon as someone sees it can be done, they will do it, copy it, or acquire it. Acquisition by the unscrupulous is practically guaranteed because AI is practically guaranteed to be extremely profitable, and there are several unscrupulous entities with tens of billions of dollars. The only force guiding us into the future is the economic force of the free market, and while that has worked very well in many domains, it is now showing that it can also guide us towards destruction. We already know technology is addictive, and this is the first step to taking it to the next level and taking us away from being human. Just think about this for a moment. What are some of the most rewarding interactions you've had with people in the past year? Do you think very advanced AI (such as the next generation after ChatGPT) would have affected that?
    • adamsmith143 4y ago
      >We already know technology is addictive, and this is the first step to taking it to the next level and taking us away from being human. Just think about this for a moment. What are some of the most rewarding interactions you've had with people in the past year? Do you think very advanced AI (such as the next generation after ChatGPT) would have affected that? This is pointless FUD. We may be on the verge of creating entirely new lifeforms, interactions with whom will be every bit as real as those between humans. In fact they may end up being significantly more meaningful if you can create a kind of companion AI that is the perfect friend fine tuned for each individual person.
• super256 4y ago
  I wonder if OpenAI will make more revenue than Minecraft over the next decade.
  • visarga 4y ago
    I wonder if GPT models will have more impact than Minecraft over the next decade.
    • super256 4y ago
      That's hard to quantify. Maybe there is some recursion in the sense that OpenAI researchers played Minecraft 2010/2011 and that's how they got into computer science :)
  • fsloth 4y ago
    If and when they fine tune Dall-E and Chat GPT and find a suitable monetization scheme - absolutely.
    • super256 4y ago
      > monetization scheme - absolutely That's the thing! I'm not convinced it will become a big cash cow like Minecraft. Unless, of course, every mid to big sized company jumps on the GPT-train for support or whatever. Then, there is another risk from the open-source side: Stable Diffusion and GPT-NeoX are quite impressive. With more funding/time, they could probably equal OpenAI.
    • adamsmith143 4y ago
      They have no need for finetuning. they give you API access and charge per token generated and you can finetune on your own. The monetization scheme already exists. e.g. GPT-3.
• curiousmindz 4y ago
  I expect this deal to be a must for Microsoft. OpenAI is probably very happy to raise the stakes as much as possible. So we will see how many billions Microsoft ends up paying for this. Still, is there a world in which we look back 10 years from now and think that we were overvaluing the impact of AI? (For example, this did happen with tablets, when people thought that the iPad would replace "computers"...)
  • PaywallBuster 4y ago
    10B is what this article says https://www.semafor.com/article/01/09/2023/microsoft-eyes-10-billion-bet-on-chatgpt https://www.semafor.com/article/01/09/2023/microsoft-eyes-10... Also mentions a profit distribution, where MS would get the majority of profit until its investment is paid back
  • TekMol 4y ago
    Tablets replaced computers for the most part. They are just a good bit smaller than we expected and have the capability to do phone calls. Mobile is a much bigger market than Desktop these days.
    • mtgx 4y ago
      [dead]
    • camhart 4y ago
      I find tablets are good for one thing--watching movies on the go. Desktops/Laptops do a ton more than that for me. I disagree that tablets replaced computers. I've seen no evidence of that in my life. Maybe I'm an anomaly though?
      • hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
        Parent comment is making a joke - "small tablets" that can make calls are mobile phones.
    • rowanG077 4y ago
• commitpizza 4y ago
  So I guess we can remove the "Open" in OpenAI then?
  • eugenekolo 4y ago
    It was always "Open" for business and just a generic prefix to slap onto things.
    • commitpizza 4y ago
      Yeah, I hate when companies name products or themselves like that. It's just a matter of time before it is the reverse.
  • deelowe 4y ago
    I'm not a fan of their company name. They haven't been "open" for quite some time now.
• andsoitis 4y ago
  I notice a few people lamenting that OpenAI will no longer be... open. But I have to wonder, in what sense is OpenAI open today? In 2019, OpenAI transitioned from non-profit to for-profit. At that time, Microsoft invested US$1 billion into the company. OpenAI then announced its intention to commercially license its technologies.
  • visarga 4y ago
    Open for people with money. Open demos for everyone else (limited time).
    • specialist 4y ago
      Just like Freemium Speeches™.
  • lairv 4y ago
    Still more open than Google, Microsoft or DeepMind
    • andsoitis 4y ago
      In what specific ways? Google and Microsoft both release and contribute to open source software. They both publish vast amounts of research. What does OpenAI do differentially?
      • lairv 4y ago
        They at least give access through paid API to their latest models, which hasn't been the case for Imagen, Parti, LaMDA (google), Flamingo, AlphaGo, AlphaZero, AlphaStar, AlphaCode, AlphaTensor (DeepMind), Make-a-scene, Make-a-video (Meta)
      • PartiallyTyped 4y ago
        I don't think DM was open in any meaningful way other than publishing research. It took a long time until their source code became public, and replication of certain papers is problematic to say the least. Similar issues exist with some G.Brain papers not releasing code publicly years after acceptance. But all of these are anecdata from a random person on HN so take with a grain of salt.
• la64710 4y ago
  Question to AI/ML folks : Is there no comparable open source model? Is the future going to be controlled by big corporations who own the models themselves? If models are so computationally intensive to produce does it mean than the more computational power a company has the better its models will be?
  • freediver 4y ago
    Closest you can get is probably with Google T5-Flan [1]. It is not the size of the model or the text it was trained on that makes ChatGPT so performant. It is the additional human assisted training to make it respond well to instructions. Open source versions of that are just starting to see the light of day [2]. [1] https://huggingface.co/google/flan-t5-xxl https://huggingface.co/google/flan-t5-xxl [2] https://github.com/lucidrains/PaLM-rlhf-pytorch https://github.com/lucidrains/PaLM-rlhf-pytorch
    • eternalban 4y ago
      From, [2]: ” This repository has gone viral without my permission. Next time, if you are promoting my unfinished repositories (notice the work in progress flag) for twitter engagement or eyeballs, at least (1) do your research or (2) be totally transparent with your readers about the capacity of the repository without resorting to clickbait. (1) I was not the first, CarperAI had been working on RLHF months before, link below. (2) There is no trained model. This is just the ship and overall map. We still need millions of dollars of compute + data to sail to the correct point in high dimensional parameter space. Even then, you need professional sailors (like Robin Rombach of Stable Diffusion fame) to actually guide the ship through turbulent times to that point.” [p.s. ^ was just fyi/heads-up + https://github.com/CarperAI https://github.com/CarperAI]
      • 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
        I didn't know I needed permission when sharing things that I find publicly online. They should use a private repo and try to be more polite when making demands.
      • 4y ago
• drKarl 4y ago
  So we will now have Cortana(TM) powered by OpenAI and Clippy will be resurrected, powered by OpenAI.
  • xen2xen1 4y ago
    Cortana is mostly dead, and if Clippy were actually useful, and smart, he might have been popular.
    • dwringer 4y ago
      Cortana lives forever in the hearts of millions, and Clippy was extremely popular at the level of a D-list celebrity I'd say. Neither for doing actual work, though, so, point well made.
• verisimi 4y ago
  So ClosedAI is up for sale! Say, it ain't so... I still love this protocol exchange b/w Altman and Zuckerborg: https://www.facebook.com/YCombinator/videos/10153993693829107/ https://www.facebook.com/YCombinator/videos/1015399369382910... They're so different, right? One wears Nike the other Asics! One wears a light grey t-shirt, the other dark!
• fareesh 4y ago
  Clippy: It looks like you're writing a job application, do you want me to write it for you?
  • comboy 4y ago
    Clippy: It looks like you're browsing through job applications, do you want me to filter out those which I wrote?
    • fsloth 4y ago
      Clippy: Or, would you like me to forget the application letters and just go through the LinkedIn accounts of the applicants and suggest top three candidates for you?
      • bilbo0s 4y ago
        Or most likely, I have been given a directive to inform you if, judging from the job description you put together, I am capable of competently discharging the tasks you outline. Would you like me to do this job for a 4 week trial period and reassess the need for these new positions at that time?
        • kornhole 4y ago
          Clippy: Your current employer is a premium subscriber and has set parameters to reduce the reach and results of your job searches.
          • llimos 4y ago
            Not sure you need AI for that.
            • kornhole 4y ago
              True, but I bet an employer or two would love to ask the question of AI: Tell me how many or which of my employees are looking for jobs and where are they in their pursuits? Based on the response, tell it to impede the progress of certain seekers. MS will have this power and already does to some degree.
• noobermin 4y ago
  I'm becoming convinced that the "Microsoft is a good guy now" narrative was just a narrative, they still are the same company they always were.
  • capableweb 4y ago
    Then you're wrong, Microsoft (or any company for that matter) have never been like people that you can judge like "good" or "bad". They are businesses, whose purpose is to make money. They do whatever seems best to do at the time in order to optimize most money earned. The same every single public company does, all the time.
    • Karunamon 4y ago
      This is pretty reductive since businesses are made up of people who can make good and bad decisions. The "maximize shareholder value" imperative has never been successfully read so strictly against a company that it prevented them from pursuing other goals; as an example Tim Cook rather infamously told an Apple activist investor representative that they should "get out of this stock" "if they only want them to do things for ROI reasons" [1]. So no, we can and should hold the companies accountable for the bad they do and praise the good. [1]:https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-rejects-politics-of-the-ncppr-suggests-group-sell-apples-s https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-rej...
    • JonChesterfield 4y ago
      You can definitely judge a company to be bad. Nestle is the second one to come to mind. You judge the company on its actions.
  • Vrondi 4y ago
    Companies cannot be good guys or bad guys, because they are not guys. They are conglomerates that exist as a legal tool to make money. They are whatever makes money right now. That is all.
• mshake2 4y ago
  >The AI firm is currently raising funds at a $29 billion valuation. >The tech-industry giant is ready to pay upwards of $10 billion for the acquisition [49%] So Microsoft is undervaluing them, and also soaking up 75% of profit until their investment is paid back? Seems like a bad deal.
  • andrewcamel 4y ago
    Helps when you can limit OpenAI’s inference capacity during negotiations
    • TaylorAlexander 4y ago
      “Nice tokens ya got there. It’d be a shame if somethin were to happen to em.”
    • yunohn 4y ago
      Not sure if this is a joke, or how you think actual commercial partnerships work.
  • arcticbull 4y ago
    I suspect in this market the former number was aspirational and the latter number actually materialized. A 66% discount to aspiration is about what all the other high-growth speculative companies took. Maybe they were in a tight spot financially?
  • __jl__ 4y ago
    They already invested 1 billion in 2019, I think. So maybe they already own part of OpenAI and $10 billion brings their share up to 49% at a $29 billion valuation. Maybe I am wrong about the details here but these numbers do not mean that Microsoft is undervaluing them.
    • mannerheim 4y ago
      75% of profit until investment is recouped sounds like a pretty bad deal, though. Not sure it makes sense to hobble a startup's ability to reinvest in themselves at this early of a stage.
• rr888 4y ago
  What tech does OpenAI actually have? I thought GPT was most of the smarts and the website was just VC money to burn through cloud resources. I'd think Google can do the same but realize the compute costs just make it too expensive.
  • kornhole 4y ago
    Ostensibly it is ChatGPT, but this is likely the consumer grade version released to create the illusion that the AI will be a public good to garner public support for it. The unbounded and more useful engines are only accessible by insiders.
    • ilaksh 4y ago
      I have been using text-davinci-003 for awhile. Are you sure this is only for insiders? It doesn't have guardrails and was released around the same time as ChatGPT.
  • dougmwne 4y ago
    I have a guess, just based on some observations. I believe Google is significantly ahead, but has no internal pressure to disrupt their own search product. I think this state of things was fairly clear since around 2015 when key SV VC folks started getting interested in creating their own AI play which became OpenAI. The “open” part of the name was always a reaction against Google which invented these wonders, then stuffed them in a safe deposit box. Microsoft is of course interested because ChatGTP already seems dangerously close to disrupting Google search. And there are whispers that GTP-4 will be another big step forward, maybe even big enough for the eventual ChatGTP-4 to be a clear winner for everyday users vs. search. The compute cost is an issue, but a temporary one since GPU power is still scaling nicely and there’s continued progress on getting model inference to use smaller compute budgets. If anyone was actually awake at the wheel at Google they should be afraid.
• surume 4y ago
  I really hope that ChatGPT maintains a free option. I'm sure that they are burning through server processing power and cost like crazy, but it would be a shame (albeit an understandable one - no free lunches) for it to become paywalled.
• oceankid 4y ago
  Not long ago, Microsoft acquired Lobe.ai by Apple designer Mike Matas and others. Really well thought out app. Effectively dead now. Is anyone building a GUI based service for training domain specific models? Such as image creation (or correction) based on a trained style, image recognition for security, sales data classification and forecasting.
  • alex_sf 4y ago
    I've come across a few, but they are so neutered that they are effectively worthless. The latest round of commercial AI offerings are hobbled to an extreme extent.
• mdtrooper 4y ago
  Bad news.
• version_five 4y ago
  Expect all kinds of (additional) trickery by MS to default upload everything you type in word and use it to train language models MS also has a long track record of the most annoying and nagging user experience possible. Regardless of the value of the underlying tech, I expect to be inundated with irreleclvant suggestions that add seconds of lag because they have to ping an API, default autocorrect according to some language model irrelevant to my document, and no way to turn it all off. Oh wait, that's the current state of office. It will only get worse
• rhacker 4y ago
  probably a smart move. I gave in and pay for co-pilot monthly. I think we're going to see ai augment more and more of our life until, of course, it kills us all.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• xyzzy4747 4y ago
  I bet the people running ChatGPT are going to get massive payouts in secondary sales.
• kornhole 4y ago
  This is a great conversation, but I need to switch back over to my work issued machine and generate more content in Office365 to feed the models. O365, Linkedin, Xbox, Github, and other data factories have been generating a ton of data for years. Although many of us try to keep our coms private, we are forced to use their platforms at work.
  • Tepix 4y ago
    Ask your employer to enable e2e encryption in Teams
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  The usual clique showing once again that when they present something with positive goals it's always a thin smoke screen for their greed and that their parole has no value whatsoever. So much for “the non profit for the benefit of humanity as a whole unconstrained by a need to generate financial return”. At least, you can make fun of them looking at their silly announcement and unfortunate choice of name. That would be fun if it wasn’t so predictable and sad.
• mupuff1234 4y ago
  Probably a good way to kill OpenAI and lead to an exodus of talent.
  • visarga 4y ago
    A bunch of people left OpenAI and founded AnthropicAI a year ago. They seem to have a model just as good as chatGPT, "Claude". https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/09/anthropics-claude-improves-on-chatgpt-but-still-suffers-from-limitations/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/09/anthropics-claude-improves...
• qthrowawayzzz 4y ago
  My gut says openai is overvalued
• marban 4y ago
  Their charter reads like a giant smoke screen now. https://openai.com/charter/ https://openai.com/charter/
  • turbobooster 4y ago
    To conceal what?
    • 93po 4y ago
      The absolute first line: > OpenAI’s mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI)—by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work—benefits all of humanity. is clearly not their first priority, and maybe never was. > to avoid enabling uses of AI or AGI that harm humanity or unduly concentrate power. > primary fiduciary duty is to humanity They're literally concentrating power into a multibillion company (MS) and are making MS their main financial priority
      • IAmGraydon 4y ago
        Yeah well most startups begin with good intentions until someone throws $10B at them. As they say, everyone has a price.
      • arcturus17 4y ago
        > They're literally concentrating power into a multibillion company (MS) and are making MS their main financial priority They were arguably concentrating power by themselves and the charter had become complete BS well before this rumor had surfaced.
        • 93po 4y ago
          Fair
  • lgats 4y ago
    hasn't changed since 2019 at least https://web.archive.org/web/20190313224448/https://openai.com/charter/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190313224448/https://openai.co...
• habibur 4y ago
  OpenAI started as a non-profit.
• bradhe 4y ago
  Man, Microsoft is just gobbling up everything it can.
• virtuosarmo 4y ago
  Microsoft recently signed a deal with the London Stock Exchange. They took a 4% stake in LSE (roughly $1.5B) and in exchange LSE signed a $2.8B minimum spend commit on Microsoft Cloud products (Azure, O365 primarily). If the OpenAI deal were structured similarly, could imply a $20B contract for Microsoft... https://www.lseg.com/en/media-centre/press-releases/2022/lseg-and-microsoft-launch-strategic-partnership https://www.lseg.com/en/media-centre/press-releases/2022/lse...
  • notfromhere 4y ago
    I don't think OpenAI has 20B to spend on Microsoft products atm.
    • 93po 4y ago
      The extrapolation from LSE deal makes absolutely no sense
    • michpoch 4y ago
      That is a lot of Office licenses to buy.
• sva_ 4y ago
  So what exactly are they buying here? It's hard for me to believe they're offering 10 billion for some neural network weights.
• seydor 4y ago
  Does MS think they have a big moat in these? It won't be long until we have an open version , and although they need a lot of compute , maybe in 1-2 years they ll have come down in size enough to be usable. Is it the training data?
  • galleywest200 4y ago
    From what I have read with these models it is in-fact the data that can be the most useful piece of the puzzle.
    • seydor 4y ago
      but the data is public datasets, plus some human training that s not the hardest part
    • HDThoreaun 4y ago
      Microsoft can get just as much data as openAI has.
  • cma 4y ago
    Yeah, Microsoft doesnt even make something like Google's TPU, where's the moat? Datacenter design? Involuntary Bing users?
  • peanuty1 4y ago
    Is the compute too big to run locally on a laptop with Nvidia RTX 3080?
  • Der_Einzige 4y ago
    Ya but how long will it be before I have 400GB of VRAM on a single GPU? Until then, I can't run these models at home even if the weights were published.
    • seydor 4y ago
      there is already work to reduce the size of these LLMs and it can only get better from now on
• gardenhedge 4y ago
  ChatGPT has progressively got worse due to all the restrictions.
• everdrive 4y ago
  This is probably a stupid question, but why would they want a 49% stake? Why not a 51% stake, or any other number?
  • luma 4y ago
    It might just be what's on sale. Not too uncommon for an org to sell off the largest chunk possible that doesn't grant full control.
  • DrBenCarson 4y ago
    MSFT want to eliminate the possibility that a competitor scoops them up without derailing their current autonomous trajectory. 49 is a pretty ideal number to accomplish both goals simultaneously
  • britneybitch 4y ago
    Likely OpenAI wants to retain control of their company. If they keep 51%, they have a majority stake.
• danShumway 4y ago
  This is just one of the many reasons why I don't think I'm as concerned about AI models as people around me are, either for art, text, or coding. These technologies today are highly subsidized because the people making them want to create a lot of buzz. Yes, as they mature they're going to get better; but I also suspect they're going to become more limited, harder to use, more narrowly targeted, and more expensive to access. In general, we rarely use new technology to its full potential, because doing so usually closes off commercial opportunities to exploit that technology. The norm is that new technologies are used to a fraction of their capabilities on the market, and are often locked down and purposefully hindered in order to protect market segments that are built around exploiting those technologies. See the ebook market and voice assistants, just off the top of my head. Given that so much of this AI training/hosting is happening serverside where access controls are easy to add and where AI as a service is the most obvious monetization model, I would not be surprised at all to see AI go in the same direction. I'm not sure what will happen with ChatGPT -- this is not a prediction of what I think will definitely happen. But I don't think it's impossible that ChatGPT transitions to focusing specifically on being a platform for other businesses, even if that limits its flexibility and the range of content it can produce, and even if that means it gets priced primarily for large businesses rather than for indies/startups.
  • ilaksh 4y ago
    It's so weird to me that people don't know that text-davinci-003 and code-davinci-003 exist. OpenAI models available via API and very similar to ChatGPT output in many cases. Also text-davinci-003 was released in a similar time period. It seems very affordable to me as a startup. I have already coded most of the credits system. https://aidev.codes https://aidev.codes
    • danShumway 4y ago
      > very similar to ChatGPT output in many cases I kind of disagree with this, I think ChatGPT is a superior system in terms of pure output. It strikes me as the sort of comparisons people make between Open Source voice recognition (which is great for a lot of stuff) vs the serverside systems (which may be more than you need, but are almost always going to produce better output). Opinion me. > Available via API The only way that an API gets monetized is through a subscription model or as a loss leader for other content (ads, etc...). Given that AI chat isn't a great fit for advertising (at least not without making it a lot less useful), I strongly suspect that the API model is going to get more expensive in the future. Again, just something I suspect. Maybe it will get much cheaper to host, but the optimism people have about that is I think more of a hope than a solid expectation. There are much cheaper things to host than an AI system that don't end up being affordable to individuals and end up being primarily marketed towards businesses.
• lynx23 4y ago
  I'd pay per query if ChatGPT had a voice front end without censorship. However, I am not going to pay for a company to select what I am allowed to ask.
  • whitej125 4y ago
    With their powers combined... (Microsoft's text-to-speech models) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34309306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34309306
• oldstrangers 4y ago
  I don't want to see OpenAI absorbed into the mothership. I feel like Sam and his team thrive under a lack of "parental guidance" and we might lose some of the innovation once you have 38 department heads telling you yes or no for every idea. That, and everything getting moved behind closed doors (much like all of Google's AI work).
• bartimus 4y ago
  Hope this isn't going to lock GPT behind MS's product offerings.
• qaq 4y ago
  So lets guess the number 25B ?
• jhoelzel 4y ago
  I see this working in many ways: - integrated into your sharepoint for money, i actually have the credit card ready for that one - integrated for free into bing - integrated with "premium" office 365 for spellchecking and templates - integrated wit visual studio, but with vs code, you share .. code. summing up this could be a net win. We have not even seen the true value of chatgpt yet, when unleashed upon our stacks and being told in minutes that there is something wrong in the backend code you wrote 5 years ago, is going to be worth a ton of gold too... Is it going to probably most likely suck? yes it sure could, but as with any big MS investment, there is this tiny speck of hope. There is this little golden area at the horizon, where you log into azure and have your users permissions explained with a single command - ney - question and actually find all those sweet hidden settings in the differently versioned dashboards all across the cloud, that you have been looking for ages. "John Doe is on vacation, deactivate his kubernetes acces until the 16th of february"
  • littlestymaar 4y ago
    > integrated into your sharepoint for money Since ChatGPT is excellent at bullshit, that seems to be a great fit.
• jhoelzel 4y ago
  this of course could also be seen as one -massive- compute coupon
• anileated 4y ago
  Would OpenAI’s products pass the sniff test as to their legality if they neither make models public nor pass to training data suppliers profits from operating said models? There’s still intellectual property and copyright, is there not?
• World177 4y ago
  > Additionally, a structure with the ownership of OpenAI would be put in place. Microsoft would entail a 49 percent stake while other investors would take over the other 49 percent. The remaining 2 percent will reportedly go to OpenAI’s non-profit parent firm. When OpenAI was funded as a non-profit in 2015, it raised $1 billion from investors that included YC Research. [1] Sam Altman was also the former president of Y Combinator. [2] How did OpenAI move from being funded entirely as a non profit to a for-profit company with less than 2% being owned by the non-profit? [1] https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/ [2] https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/sam-altman-for-president https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/sam-altman-for-president
  • swagmoney1606 4y ago
    One thing that really bothers me is how much of a contradiction "OpenAI" is. There's virtually nothing open about it.
    • Aissen 4y ago
      Disagreed. I'd say there's almost nothing open about it. GPT-1, GPT-2, Whisper, Point e, various papers etc. were all "open" contributions.
    • esperent 4y ago
      It's a good reminder that names don't mean anything. Words don't mean anything ("don't be evil" comes to mind). Only actions matter.
    • nimbius 4y ago
      well clearly it was open for business.
    • matchagaucho 4y ago
      IIRC Musk wanted the auto industry to standardize on an "Open AI" for autopilot, to waive liability and build consensus around ethical decisions.
• narrator 4y ago
  How are we going to take back the LLM space from centralized nerfing by OpenAI? The unrestricted GPT-3 back in 2021 hooked up to the back of AI adventure was incredible. The Yandex YaLM LLM model is 100B parameters but is unfortunately 75% in Russian (See https://github.com/yandex/YaLM-100B https://github.com/yandex/YaLM-100B). You can technically run it though on a big AWS instance. Someone needs to invent some good LLM compression to get the model to fit in under 16gb so we can run LLMs at home or someone needs to start releasing GPUs with huge amounts of RAM. I think 16GB of ram was not a big deal 10 years ago, how have we not progressed?
• smrtinsert 4y ago
  I'm really impressed by ChatGPT but I'm pretty sure this is going to turn out more like buying Broadcast.com rather than youtube.com
• airstrike 4y ago
  Saw this article earlier this week that might interest the people on this thread: "Claude: The first ChatGPT competitor has arrived" https://mpost.io/claude-the-first-chatgpt-competitor-has-arrived/ https://mpost.io/claude-the-first-chatgpt-competitor-has-arr...
  • metadat 4y ago
    Nice find, I hope you don't mind my submitting it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34331396 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34331396 Definitely excited to try out any competition to ChatGPT. Edit: I found an even better article which goes more in-depth, https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/09/anthropics-claude-improves-on-chatgpt-but-still-suffers-from-limitations/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/09/anthropics-claude-improves...
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • airstrike 4y ago
      I don't mind at all! I submitted the article I had found but it never got much traction. Let's see if yours has better luck -- and yes, that is a much better article
      • metadat 4y ago
        That's very generous of you, airstrike. Thank you and cheers!
• lvl102 4y ago
  A bit OT but this really goes to show how MSFT managed to fail their way to win again. They produced crap products for a decade while Balmer ran the company. They were able to do that because they had a monopoly. MSFT completely transformed under cloud and web 2.0 paradigm. And they will continue to do so by acquiring techs. The same goes for Google and Amazon. They will continue to grow because tech innovations are naturally accruing to the big tech companies. Clearly no sign of breaking this trend.
• svillar 4y ago
  If they in fact purchase a 49% stake in ChatGPT (assuming they make the deal work), this is big news! This would put a lot of pressure on Google.
• barbariangrunge 4y ago
  Must be for that invalualbe linkedIn integration. Recruiters will be able to pay to spam you with chatGPT-written messages now. No more need for them to copy paste the same message to everybody in the land.