5 ms·
I’m not sure why that doesn’t make sense. In a winner takes all market, where the product is highly complex, which is likely the case for any product developed
by rhaway84773 4y ago
I’m not sure why that doesn’t make sense.
In a winner takes all market, where the product is highly complex, which is likely the case for any product developed since the advent of computers, if not before, the predominant position will almost certainly be taken by somebody, and since it’s a highly complex product, it’s likely no one entity thought of and/or implemented even close to a majority of the ideas needed to make it work.
In fact, it’s likely to be a random winner amongst 10-20 entities who implemented some of the ideas, and another potentially larger number of entities who implemented equally good, or even better, ideas, which happened to fail for reasons that couldn’t have been known in advance.
- curiousllama 4y ago> In a winner takes all market Just because Search was winner take all, doesn't mean AI will be. What network effects or economies of scale are unachievable by competitors? Besides, Alpaca showed you can replicate ChatGPT on the cheap once its built - what's stopping others from succeeding?
- tyfon 4y agoYeah, I don't think this will be a corporate thing but a private decentralized thing. It's probably the worst fear of the likes of google etc, a 100% local "search engine" / knowledge center that does not even require the internet. I've been running the 65B model for a bit. With the correct prompt engineering you get very good results even without any fine tuning. I can run stable diffusion etc fine too locally. If anything will let us break free from the corporate, it is this.
- moritzwarhier 4y agoAlpaca is surprisingly good, but mostly because it supports the dialogue format out of the box. IME, it does not nearly replicate ChatGPT.