4 ms·

The iceberg is definitely return on investment. OpenAI will eventually hit a peak that is not AGI and it’s shareholders will revolt.

inciampati 2y ago
Probably exhaustion of human created data. The plateau is coming and much smarter techniques will be needed to go beyond it.
bruce511 2y ago
I don't think there'll be AGI (which is in itself a term that means different things to different people) anytime soon, if ever. That doesn't detract from the utility of what is there already. I'm currently using it quite a lot as a "tutor" (of sorts) as I deep-dive into an area I have limited experience with. Like all tutors it gets some things wrong (which in turn reflects human misunderstandings). It is sufficiently good though at directing the flow, which in turn gives me Google terms to search. I say this not as a rabid AI fan, I've come to it reluctantly, but its proving useful. So I don't think shareholders will revolt (which means what? That the share price will drop?) - I think they'll just continue to provide (improved) utility and their user base will grow. This isn't like fusion where there's a binary measure of success. Of course, like any business, there will be challenges along the way. Some survive those (Apple, MS, Google etc), some don't (Sun, DEC, Amiga). Predicting which ones succeed and which ones fail is hard. And seldom correlated to culture. The article is fluff because it makes no conclusion, adds no data, is just a single ex-employees opinion. Meh.
- kaast202 2y ago
  it is useful, i do not understand people hating on it calling it useless. I have used it countless times for various things from work to things around the house.
  - ChicagoDave 2y ago
    It is not useless and no one is saying that it is. What we are saying is that GenAI will never be able to go beyond code helper or assistant and the people hyping these tools continually promise AGI or something that can solve complex problems. The ROI is just not there and eventually there will be a margin call.
    - bruce511 2y ago
      Since it is useful without AGI, and since that means it can be monetized, I don't believe the "shareholders will revolt" (which was the original assertion.) There us plenty of value yo be unlocked well short of AGI. Are investors excited? Yes. Is that excitement being fueled by hype? yes. Will excitement cool eventually? Sure. Will some investors, investing in the wrong thing, lose money? Sure. But "revolt" (whatever that means) - no, IMO not.
m463 2y ago
Maybe it will be like tesla and FSD. The promises will be enough to get to usable AI as a helpful tool which makes money, without the perfectionism of something impossible. In my analogy, personally I don't care about FSD, what you get is helpful. Dangerous is as overblown as EV fires. (think of human drivers and gasoline fires)

inciampati 2y ago

Probably exhaustion of human created data. The plateau is coming and much smarter techniques will be needed to go beyond it.

bruce511 2y ago

I don't think there'll be AGI (which is in itself a term that means different things to different people) anytime soon, if ever. That doesn't detract from the utility of what is there already. I'm currently using it quite a lot as a "tutor" (of sorts) as I deep-dive into an area I have limited experience with. Like all tutors it gets some things wrong (which in turn reflects human misunderstandings). It is sufficiently good though at directing the flow, which in turn gives me Google terms to search. I say this not as a rabid AI fan, I've come to it reluctantly, but its proving useful. So I don't think shareholders will revolt (which means what? That the share price will drop?) - I think they'll just continue to provide (improved) utility and their user base will grow. This isn't like fusion where there's a binary measure of success. Of course, like any business, there will be challenges along the way. Some survive those (Apple, MS, Google etc), some don't (Sun, DEC, Amiga). Predicting which ones succeed and which ones fail is hard. And seldom correlated to culture. The article is fluff because it makes no conclusion, adds no data, is just a single ex-employees opinion. Meh.

kaast202 2y ago
it is useful, i do not understand people hating on it calling it useless. I have used it countless times for various things from work to things around the house.
- ChicagoDave 2y ago
  It is not useless and no one is saying that it is. What we are saying is that GenAI will never be able to go beyond code helper or assistant and the people hyping these tools continually promise AGI or something that can solve complex problems. The ROI is just not there and eventually there will be a margin call.
  - bruce511 2y ago
    Since it is useful without AGI, and since that means it can be monetized, I don't believe the "shareholders will revolt" (which was the original assertion.) There us plenty of value yo be unlocked well short of AGI. Are investors excited? Yes. Is that excitement being fueled by hype? yes. Will excitement cool eventually? Sure. Will some investors, investing in the wrong thing, lose money? Sure. But "revolt" (whatever that means) - no, IMO not.

m463 2y ago

Maybe it will be like tesla and FSD. The promises will be enough to get to usable AI as a helpful tool which makes money, without the perfectionism of something impossible. In my analogy, personally I don't care about FSD, what you get is helpful. Dangerous is as overblown as EV fires. (think of human drivers and gasoline fires)