3 ms·

Just wait... In the eyes of many OpenAI caught Google (especially) flat-footed with ChatGPT. I know six year olds that use ChatGPT as (more or less) a fun toy.

Just wait... In the eyes of many OpenAI caught Google (especially) flat-footed with ChatGPT. I know six year olds that use ChatGPT as (more or less) a fun toy. You can hear them say "I want to play AI" which in their minds (whether they realize it or not) for the time being is OpenAI. There's a lot of reputation, valuation, and mindshare on the line here. OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Meta, etc are going to be tit-for-tat slugging it out on "AI" for the foreseeable future with pesky things like bias, safety, etc going further and further to the wayside as the race and pace heats up. It's going to get wild.

rvz 4y ago
And Stablilty.ai caught OpenAI flat-footed and destroyed DALLE-2's moat with Stable Diffusion, reducing it to a complete toy in terms of adoption. Stability.ai or someone else will eventually do the same thing to ChatGPT.
- kkielhofner 4y ago
  Generally agree - but I'd argue current AI hype is centered around LLMs. The area is moving so fast DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are more-or-less old news in terms of attention (which is kind of ridiculous but indicative of where we already are). I still love them, and HN still loves them, but you're not going to see a DALL-E or SD focused story in the Wall Street Journal these days. The most recent DALL-E focused WSJ article was over a month ago (and it was about the controversy surrounding theft/use of work to train). The most recent WSJ article focused on ChatGPT was 43 minutes ago. At this point that's a lifetime in AI land. Additionally, most consider DALL-E to be vastly superior to SD and between this and the technical challenges of making use of SD I think it's an exaggeration to say the DALL-E moat has been "destroyed". Yes, eventually an open "close enough" ChatGPT equivalent will likely exist. However, the resources required to practically utilize it will likely be at least 10x compared to SD (from consumer GPU to multiple A100/V100/H100 80GB VRAM level). That's a significant barrier leap. Meanwhile, by that time OpenAI and the other big players I referenced will be sucking the oxygen out of the room with whatever other significant developments they unleash unto the world. I, for one, would love to see more open models and weights but for obvious monetary and resource reasons the big players will almost certainly always be a few steps ahead. Open models and weights are still a great thing for those of us that can make something of them but it's already a two-tier ecosystem and that gap is likely to continue to grow.

rvz 4y ago

And Stablilty.ai caught OpenAI flat-footed and destroyed DALLE-2's moat with Stable Diffusion, reducing it to a complete toy in terms of adoption. Stability.ai or someone else will eventually do the same thing to ChatGPT.

kkielhofner 4y ago
Generally agree - but I'd argue current AI hype is centered around LLMs. The area is moving so fast DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are more-or-less old news in terms of attention (which is kind of ridiculous but indicative of where we already are). I still love them, and HN still loves them, but you're not going to see a DALL-E or SD focused story in the Wall Street Journal these days. The most recent DALL-E focused WSJ article was over a month ago (and it was about the controversy surrounding theft/use of work to train). The most recent WSJ article focused on ChatGPT was 43 minutes ago. At this point that's a lifetime in AI land. Additionally, most consider DALL-E to be vastly superior to SD and between this and the technical challenges of making use of SD I think it's an exaggeration to say the DALL-E moat has been "destroyed". Yes, eventually an open "close enough" ChatGPT equivalent will likely exist. However, the resources required to practically utilize it will likely be at least 10x compared to SD (from consumer GPU to multiple A100/V100/H100 80GB VRAM level). That's a significant barrier leap. Meanwhile, by that time OpenAI and the other big players I referenced will be sucking the oxygen out of the room with whatever other significant developments they unleash unto the world. I, for one, would love to see more open models and weights but for obvious monetary and resource reasons the big players will almost certainly always be a few steps ahead. Open models and weights are still a great thing for those of us that can make something of them but it's already a two-tier ecosystem and that gap is likely to continue to grow.