6 ms·

this is quite worrying for OpenAI as the rate token prices have been plummeting thanks to Meta and its going to have to keep cutting its prices while capex rema

• hiddencost 2y ago
  I suspect that when it costs 0.5c per 100 million generated token, and you can generate 1000 tokens per second, they'll be very happy.
• j-bos 2y ago
  Isn't that why he's making rounds to lock down the biggest AI's?
• michelsedgh 2y ago
  I agree with you somewhat. You are correct unless they have a much better GPT model that have not released for whatever reason. They are a year ahead than competitors and GPT4 is pretty old now. I find it hard to believe they don’t have much more capable models now. We Will see though
  • easygenes 2y ago
    There's wide speculation that what will be branded as either GPT-4.5 or GPT-5 has finished pretraining now and is undergoing internal testing for a fairly near-term release.
    • michelsedgh 2y ago
      My speculation is that internally they have much stronger models like Q* but they won’t be able to release them to public even if they want to for lack of compute and safety and other reasons they see probably…
      • kaliqt 2y ago
        They don't actually care about safety, that's a lie, so compute and business strategy is the only thing stopping them. SoRA is the same. It's not ready and it's too slow.
      • whimsicalism 2y ago
        I am curious whether this is true - OAI at least has the reputation in the industry of caring the least about safety of the major labs
        • hhh 2y ago
          If they don’t care about safety (or perceived safety), why do they spend so much time lobotomizing models for safety reasons?
          • Terretta 2y ago
            market reach e.g. ability to have chat app on iOS (the API is less limited) public relations, limit the edge case nonsense 'journalists' hype so corporate execs aren't terrorized into avoiding buying doesn't have to be as smart as it could be, it just has to be smarter than other models, so might as well file down some sharp edges for sake of above
          • realusername 2y ago
            Because of PR reasons. They want to avoid government legislations and pretending that they care helps
          • whimsicalism 2y ago
            I didn’t say they don’t care about safety, merely that of the big labs they care the least or close to the least
      • torginus 2y ago
        Honestly I'm pretty puzzled by this mystical fog that hangs over OpenAIs skunkworks projects - don't people leave for other jobs/go to conferences etc.? I'm surprised that nobody call tell what they infact do or do not have.
  • j45 2y ago
    The polish of OpenAI stuff when released has been quite mature since gpt4 or even 3.5. They are no doubt sitting on ultra polished stuff. When you are the tip of the arrow though and the cutting edge itself it might not be as efficient but does it ever show you things you can’t unsee. When OpenAI can launch a video thing a day after because it’s ready to go. I am less and less skeptical e dry time they ship because the quality of the first version isn’t sliding back wards even in different areas like video. Maybe releasing it is strategic, or releasing it also requires supporting it infrastructure wise and then some. That might be a challenge. My feeling is the next model of an k between may have massive efficiency and performance improvements without having to go quantum with brute forcing it. Meanwhile others who are following what OpenAI has done seem to be able to optimize it and make it more efficient whether it’s open source or otherwise. Both are doing important work and I'm not sure I want to see it as a one winner take all game. The way AI vendors are responding suddenly to another’s launch feels like they are always ready to launch and continue to add functionality to it that could also ship. It reminds me of when Google spent a billion dollars advertising bing had a billion pages indexed. Google stayed quiet. Then when the money was spent by Microsoft, Google simply added a zero or two to their search page, when they used to list how many pages they have indexed. They were just sitting on it already done, announcing it when it’s to their benefit.
    • mark_l_watson 2y ago
      Also, what will the effect of open models be on the LLM provider industry? What effect will Meta’s scorched earth policy of killing markets by releasing very good open models have? I use LLMs constantly, but no longer in a commercial environment (I am retired except for writing books, performing personal research projects, and small consulting tasks). I now usually turn first to local models for most things: ellama+Emacs is good enough for me to mostly stop using GPT-4+Emacs or GitHub Copilot, the latest open 7B, 8B, 30B models running on my Mac seem sufficient for most of the NLP and data manipulating things I do. However, it is also fantastic to have long context Gemini, OpenAI APIs, Claude, etc. available when needed or just to experiment with.
  • imtringued 2y ago
    I'm not saying Claude 3 and Gemini are better than GPT4 in every aspect, but those two models can at least perform addition on arbitrarily long numbers, meanwhile GPT4 struggles.
  • Plankaluel 2y ago
    GPT-4 is not a single model. The GPT-4 that was released initially a year ago is way worse in benchmarks than the newest versions of it and the original version has been beat by quite a lot of other models by this point. The newest version of GPT-4 is probably still overall the best model currently, but it is only a few months old, and the picture depends a lot on what benchmarks you are looking at. E.g. for what we are doing at our company (document processing, etc.) Claude-3 Opus and Gemini-1.5 Pro are currently the better models. The newest GPT-4 even performed worse than a previous version. So to me it def. seems like the gap is getting smaller. Of course, OpenAI could be coming out with GPT-5 next week and it could be vastly better than all other current models.
• jiggawatts 2y ago
  There’s a Pareto frontier where Meta is pushing out the boundaries along the “private” and “cheap” axes. Open AI can release GPT 4.5 or 5 and push out the boundary in the direction of “correctness” and “multimodality”. Either way, we win as customers while the the level of competition remains this hot. I personally want a smart AI much more than a cheap or fast one. Your mileage may vary.
  • mft_ 2y ago
    Well, Pareto is about optimisation, not either/or. I want a model that’s smart enough, while also being locally-executable. I don’t know whether/when we’ll get there, and whether it will be improvements in models, or underlying model technology, or GPU/TPUs with larger memory at a consumer price point, or something else, that will deliver it.
    • jiggawatts 2y ago
      That's just the middle of the Pareto frontier. Some people want one corner, others the other corner. It's like compression. You can have light compression and high speed, vice-versa, or a balance. You want balance. I want one of the corners.
• 14u2c 2y ago
  Most of the big "investments" in OpenAI are in the form of compute credits. I fail to see the downside of that.
• moralestapia 2y ago
  Disclaimer: not a fan of "Open"AI Everyone could say anything about open source models, but they're comparing themselves to what OpenAI released a year ago. They haven't shown all of their cards yet and they have a decent moat already in place; some say they have no moat, I disagree, they have one of the best moats possible which is brand awareness. Sora on its own could bring in billions in revenue; an open-source Sora will take at least another year, if not two, to come out. Then more time until it can run on commodity hardware. An open source model that only runs in a dedicated H100 is actually less useful than a closed model behind an API call; not to detract from open source, I think it's the way to go but I'm just being pragmatic and realistic. There's a reason why MS Office is still the top productivity app in the world, even though dozens of open source alternatives exist.
  • poslathian 2y ago
    MS had yet to fully stabilize that lead a full decade after they had won the os platform standard for ibm compatible pcs. A platform standard moat goes way way beyond a brand advantage. Azure, while significant, has no similar monopoly to support OpenAI. Do you really see a structural advantage to openAI beyond the Microsoft products integrating it?
    • moralestapia 2y ago
      Can you clarify what is meant by "structural advantage"?
  • Hendrikto 2y ago
    > they have one of the best moats possible which is brand awareness. Do they though? If you talk to "regular people", everybody knows ChatGPT, but nobody knows or cares about OpenAI. And most of them don‘t even really know that name. They call it ChatUuuuhm, ChatThingy, Chad Gippity, or similar. I think they will just switch, when something better comes along.
    • CapeTheory 2y ago
      Good old Chatty Jeeps
• jstummbillig 2y ago
  I disagree. a) A year after GPT-4 set the bar, it's still the best model, despite everyone else not having to do it first. Just copy, and just software. And that's not for lack of trying by every other viable prime player on the planet with unprecedented acceleration. Imagine any other piece of software, where the incumbent has a mere 2-3 year head start, in which they had to work out the entire product that everyone else, despite just having to copy and pressing the pedal through the floor is struggling just trying to catch up with. b) The current models including GPT-4 are so bad. The few billions can be made by just by continue playing this game of improvements for a few years and getting better each year. I think people are wildly confused about how big this market is going to be when that happens. They are not squeezing hosting or compute. They are squeezing intelligence. Intelligence is the entire economy. The notion that there would ever not be room for multiple things here, maybe through size or specialisation or cost (as with all other intelligence), and that a few billion dollar are a big deal, is so strange to me. c) The game will at some point, be mostly about infra and optimization. People come to the conclusion that's a problem for the incumbents, when our entire industry is mostly about infra and optimization. AWS is infra and optimization. I think even the average hn tinkerer understands that therein lies a proposition that's not exactly equivalent to "just rent a few servers and do it yourself".
  • anon373839 2y ago
    > A year after GPT-4 set the bar, it's still the best model Debatable. Many people find Claude Opus superior, and I know I've found it consistently better for challenging coding questions. More importantly, the delta between GPT-4 and everything else is getting smaller and smaller. Llama 3 is basically interchangeable with GPT-4 for a huge number of tasks, despite its smaller size.
    • threeseed 2y ago
      GPT-4 was released in March 2023. Which means the research that went into it would've been finalised quite some time prior. Meaning that you're getting close to a 2 year head start.
• hackerlight 2y ago
  Depends how good their next model is, and if they prevent leaks and departures so they can prolong the lead for an undetermined amount of time.