3 ms·
> but this is a pretty obvious monetization path that they just can't not take Now that they are a commercial entity, you are right. If they had remained on th
by ehnto 1y ago
> but this is a pretty obvious monetization path that they just can't not take
Now that they are a commercial entity, you are right. If they had remained on their original mission path though I suspect this wouldn't be the no-brainer it is now.
- jstummbillig 1y agoThe "original mission path" was a) not viable and b) would not have included a product to begin with. So it actually is a no-brainer: None of this would apply, because ChatGPT simply would not exist.
- ehnto 1y agoNot viable to achieve what?
- jstummbillig 1y agoNot viable to achieve the stated goal of creating AGI (originally) as a non-profit, because the best way anyone has so far figured how to maybe do that is apparently too expensive, both in terms of capex and opex.
- Gud 1y agoPerhaps if they had remained true to their original mission, they would have been able to recruit the genius required.
- rhetocj23 1y agoLol this is delusional. If the latter was true, Google would take its tremendous cash balance and earnings and reinvest into what is necessary to reach AGI right now. OAI has a funding problem. Google in comparison most certainly does not. Google could go raise funding for it right now too. The real issue is the lack of confidence behind the supposed theory that more aggressive reinvestment yields AGI.