this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
437 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

59219 readers
3230 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] silencioso@lemmy.world 69 points 11 months ago (6 children)

So Microsoft is going to compete with themselves? (Microsoft owns 49% of openai)

[–] sederx@programming.dev 51 points 11 months ago

"I play both sides so I always come out ahead"

[–] ButtDrugs@lemm.ee 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sam probably still controls a ton of shares, so I think effectively this would give them >50% of shares as long as they are partnering.

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sam had 0 equity in OpenAI. 0 shares.

[–] ButtDrugs@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Wow really? I've never heard of a CEO not getting options.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

That's honestly really sus

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Yea the whole setup they have going on is weird.

[–] lemmyingly@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Back both horses and drop the one that loses the race.

[–] silencioso@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The thing is that there many many horses in this race

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Having two entrants is still better than one.

[–] silencioso@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Not really if you have to divide resources between two. Computing necessary for training these models is not cheap and there is an obvious opportunity cost here.

[–] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

MS has more than enough cash and resources to back two horses.

Computing necessary for training this models is not cheap and there is an obvious opportunity cost here.

This also gives them the luxury of trying a different approach.

[–] silencioso@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Time will tell my guess is that Microsoft will sale its stake in openai or just drain openai from resources and people until it will disappear.

[–] NounsAndWords@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I have no idea what MS is doing with AI internally, but predictive text is only one of the avenues towards AGI which sure seems to be the direction OpenAI (and everyone else currently looking to sell a product) are going. There are certainly other directions MS can go in the same field without putting all their eggs in one basket.

[–] Eggyhead@kbin.social 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Watch them flat out buy OpenAI then just reinstate these guys.

[–] Melt@lemm.ee 12 points 11 months ago

If OpenAI wanted to sell out, they wouldn't have fired Altman

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They’re only 2% short of being able to do that. I think Microsoft has a 49% stake.

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sam has to own at least a percent or two. Even if he doesn't bring enough shares to the table to give Microsoft the edge they need, I'm guessing he's friendly enough with a few shareholders to get them the rest of the way.

[–] lledrtx@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think Sam famously has had a 0% stake

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Huh, that's interesting. But I still assume he must have a good enough relationship with enough investors to convince at least 2% of shareholders to back Microsoft if they were partnering with him on a resolution.

[–] httpjames@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

As much as I'd love to see them back in OpenAI, I don't think Emmett Shear will give up.

I have a soft spot for Greg since he was the one who introduced the world to GPT 4 on that developer livestream

[–] Etienne_Dahu@jlai.lu 5 points 11 months ago

Same jacket, different pocket

[–] livus@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

@silencioso competing with themselves isn't that weird, for example Pfizer makes both Viagra and its generic competitor Avigra.

[–] gnutrino@programming.dev 8 points 11 months ago

That's got to be the lowest effort generic name in existence. "Ah just shift one of the letters to the start and let's knock off early"

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just like cereal companies with name brands like fruit loops will make fruit spins. Why not take profit on the lower end of the market?

[–] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And there are many other examples too.

A lot of car manufacturers have brands for the upper class. Like Mercedes -> Maybach, Toyota -> Lexus, Seat -> Cupra. And tyre manufacturers have lower-end brands, like Michelin -> Kleber. Or, even better: a lot of store budget brands for milk, cheese, sausages etc. are manufactured by a big name brand, it's right on the packaging with the little letters at the bottom. (Manufactured by: XYZ Big Name Brand Ltd.)

[–] ChrisLicht@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I had a teacher in high school, many decades ago, who had owned an orange juice processor. He explained that the generic store brand got the start and end of production runs; name brand got the middle.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Orange juice in particular is a very brand loyalty specific one because oranges naturally do not have a consistent flavor. The main distinguishing flavor between different brands is an additive each brand puts in to make it taste more like their brand of orange juice.