5 ms·

The one what? What is the secret sauce that will distinguish one LLM from another? Is it patentable? What's going to prevent all of the free LLMs from winnin

The one what? What is the secret sauce that will distinguish one LLM from another? Is it patentable? What's going to prevent all of the free LLMs from winning the prize? An AI crash seems inevitable.

schnitzelstoat 1y ago
It could end up like Search did, at first you had Lycos, AskJeeves, Altavista etc. and then Google became absolutely dominant. They want to be the Google in this scenario.
- skeeter2020 1y ago
  Then they're doing it backwards. Google first built a far superior product, then pursued all the tricks to maintain their monopoly. OpenAI at best has the illusion of a superior product, and even that is a stretch.
- camdenreslink 1y ago
  Google was by far the best product. Maybe an LLM provider will emerge in that way, but it seems they are all very similar in capability right now.
  - wyre 1y ago
    I don't believe google won the search engine wars because they had the best product, while it may be true, the won because the of the tools they provided to their users. Email, cloud storage, docs/sheets/drive, Chrome, etc
    - ncls 1y ago
      They were already pretty dominant in search by the time they released most if not all of those. They got into that position by being the better search engine - better results and nicer to use (clean design, faster loading times).
    - camdenreslink 1y ago
      They had already won the search engine wars well before any of those additional products existed.
Workaccount2 1y ago
The goal isn't to be the best LLM, the goal is to be the first self-improving LLM. On paper, whoever gets there first, along with the needed compute to hand over to the AI, wins the race.
- kurisufag 1y ago
  The moment properly self-improving AI (that doesn't run into some logistic upper bound of performance) is released, the economy breaks. The AI, having theoretically the capacity to do anything better than everyone else, will not need support (in resources or otherwise) from any other business except perhaps once to kickstart its exponential growth. If it's guarded, every other company becomes instantly worthless on the long term, and if not anyone with a bootstrap-level of compute will be able to also, do anything ever on a long enough time frame. It's not a race for ROI, it's to have your name go in the book as one of the guys that first obsoleted the relationship between effort, willpower, intelligence, etc. and the ability to bring arbitrary change to the world.
  - forgetfulness 1y ago
    The machine god would still need resources provided by humans on their terms to run; the AI wouldn’t sweat having to run, for instance, 5 years straight of its immortality just to figure out a 10 years plan to eventually run at 5% less power than now, but humans may not be willing to foot the bill for this. There’s no guarantee that the singularity makes economic sense for humans.
    - kurisufag 1y ago
      Presuming the kind of runaway superintelligence people usually discuss, the sort with agency, this just turns into a boxing problem. Are we /confident/ a machine god with `curl` can't gain its own resilient foothold on the world?
- adastra22 1y ago
  Maybe in paper, but only on paper. There are so many half baked assumptions in that self-improvement logic.
j16sdiz 1y ago
You need the infrastructure, not just the model. The model can be free, but the infrastructure (data center) ain't.
Joel_Mckay 1y ago
Silicon valley capital investment firms have always exploited regulatory capture to "compete". The public simply has a ridiculously short memory of the losers pushed out of the market during the loss-leader to exploit transition phase. Currently, the trend is not whether one technology will outpace the other in the "AI" hype-cycle ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gartner_hype_cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gartner_hype_cycle ), but it does create perceived asymmetry with skilled-labor pools. That alone is valuable leverage to a corporation, and people are getting fired or ripped off anticipating the rise of real "AI". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 One day real "AI" may exist, but a LLM or current reasoning model is unlikely going to make that happen. It is absolutely hilarious there is a cult-like devotion to the AstroTurf marketing. The question is never whether this is right or wrong... but simply how one may personally capture revenue before the Trough of disillusionment. =3

The one what? What is the secret sauce that will distinguish one LLM from another? Is it patentable? What's going to prevent all of the free LLMs from winning the prize? An AI crash seems inevitable.

schnitzelstoat 1y ago

It could end up like Search did, at first you had Lycos, AskJeeves, Altavista etc. and then Google became absolutely dominant. They want to be the Google in this scenario.

skeeter2020 1y ago
Then they're doing it backwards. Google first built a far superior product, then pursued all the tricks to maintain their monopoly. OpenAI at best has the illusion of a superior product, and even that is a stretch.
camdenreslink 1y ago
Google was by far the best product. Maybe an LLM provider will emerge in that way, but it seems they are all very similar in capability right now.
- wyre 1y ago
  I don't believe google won the search engine wars because they had the best product, while it may be true, the won because the of the tools they provided to their users. Email, cloud storage, docs/sheets/drive, Chrome, etc
  - ncls 1y ago
    They were already pretty dominant in search by the time they released most if not all of those. They got into that position by being the better search engine - better results and nicer to use (clean design, faster loading times).
  - camdenreslink 1y ago
    They had already won the search engine wars well before any of those additional products existed.

Workaccount2 1y ago

The goal isn't to be the best LLM, the goal is to be the first self-improving LLM. On paper, whoever gets there first, along with the needed compute to hand over to the AI, wins the race.

kurisufag 1y ago
The moment properly self-improving AI (that doesn't run into some logistic upper bound of performance) is released, the economy breaks. The AI, having theoretically the capacity to do anything better than everyone else, will not need support (in resources or otherwise) from any other business except perhaps once to kickstart its exponential growth. If it's guarded, every other company becomes instantly worthless on the long term, and if not anyone with a bootstrap-level of compute will be able to also, do anything ever on a long enough time frame. It's not a race for ROI, it's to have your name go in the book as one of the guys that first obsoleted the relationship between effort, willpower, intelligence, etc. and the ability to bring arbitrary change to the world.
- forgetfulness 1y ago
  The machine god would still need resources provided by humans on their terms to run; the AI wouldn’t sweat having to run, for instance, 5 years straight of its immortality just to figure out a 10 years plan to eventually run at 5% less power than now, but humans may not be willing to foot the bill for this. There’s no guarantee that the singularity makes economic sense for humans.
  - kurisufag 1y ago
    Presuming the kind of runaway superintelligence people usually discuss, the sort with agency, this just turns into a boxing problem. Are we /confident/ a machine god with `curl` can't gain its own resilient foothold on the world?
adastra22 1y ago
Maybe in paper, but only on paper. There are so many half baked assumptions in that self-improvement logic.

j16sdiz 1y ago

You need the infrastructure, not just the model. The model can be free, but the infrastructure (data center) ain't.

Joel_Mckay 1y ago

Silicon valley capital investment firms have always exploited regulatory capture to "compete". The public simply has a ridiculously short memory of the losers pushed out of the market during the loss-leader to exploit transition phase. Currently, the trend is not whether one technology will outpace the other in the "AI" hype-cycle ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gartner_hype_cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gartner_hype_cycle ), but it does create perceived asymmetry with skilled-labor pools. That alone is valuable leverage to a corporation, and people are getting fired or ripped off anticipating the rise of real "AI". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 One day real "AI" may exist, but a LLM or current reasoning model is unlikely going to make that happen. It is absolutely hilarious there is a cult-like devotion to the AstroTurf marketing. The question is never whether this is right or wrong... but simply how one may personally capture revenue before the Trough of disillusionment. =3