ChatGPT In Trouble: OpenAI may go bankrupt by 2024, AI bot costs company $700,000 every day

Yeah where the hell do these posters find these articles anyway? It's always from blogs that repost stuff from somewhere else

MS is basically getting a ton of equity in exchange for cloud credits. That's a ridiculously good deal for MS.

Their business plan got Microsoft to drop 10 billion dollars on them.

None of my shitty plans have pulled that off.

Also, their biggest expenses are cloud expenses, and they use the MS cloud, so that basically means that Microsoft is getting a ton of equity in a hot startup in exchange for cloud credits which is a ridiculously good deal for MS. Zero chance MS would let them fail.

Microsoft reported profitability in their AI products last quarter, with a substantial gain in revenue from it.

It won't take long for them to recoup their investment in OpenAI.

If OpenAI has been more responsible in how they released ChatGPT, they wouldn't be facing this problem. Just completely opening Pandora's box because they were racing to beat everyone else out was extremely irresponsible and if they go bankrupt because of it then whatever.

There's plenty of money to be made in AI without everyone just fighting over how to do it in the most dangerous way possible.

I'm also not sure nVidia is making the right decision trying their company to AI hardware. Sure, they're making mad money right now, but just like the crypto space that can dry up instantly.

Couldn’t they charge a subscription? Or sell credits?

Genuine question.

So they'll raise the cost by $100/yr.

A no brainier.

You mean 365 right? Or is there another MS product I'm unaware of?

Not trying to be a dick, I really don't know given how expansive they are.

As a Sr. Dev, I'm always floored by stories of people trying to integrate chatGPT into their development workflow.

It's not a truth machine. It has no conception of correctness. It's designed to make responses that look correct.

Would you hire a dev with no comprehension of the task, who can not reliably communicate what their code does, can not be tasked with finding and fixing their own bugs, is incapable of having accountibility, can not be reliably coached, is often wrong and refuses to accept or admit it, can not comprehend PR feedback, and who requires significantly greater scrutiny of their work because it is by explicit design created to look correct?

ChatGPT is by pretty much every metric the exact opposite of what I want from a dev in an enterprise development setting.

Copilot is pretty amazing for day to day coding, although I wonder if a junior dev might get led astray with some of its bad ideas, or too dependent on it in general.

Edit: shit, maybe I’m too dependent on it.

Link?

In this case, Microsoft owns 49% of OpenAI, so they're the ones subsidizing it. They can also offer at-cost hosting and in-roads into enterprise sales. Probably a better deal at this point than VC cash.

This is what caused spez at Reddit and Musk at Twitter to go into desperation mode and start flipping tables over. Their investors are starting to want results now, not sometime in the distant future.

I don't know anything about anything, but part of me suspects that lots of good funding is still out there, it's just being used more quietly and more scrupulously, & not being thrown at the first microdosing tech wanker with a great elevator pitch on how they're going to make "the Tesla of dental floss".

All it's every done is rob from it's employees so it can give money to stockholders. Just like every corporation.

Really says something that none of your responses yet seem to have caught that this was a joke.

if we don't know, it doesn't know.

If we know, but there's no public text about it, it doesn't know either.

it is trained off of stuff that has already been written, and trained to emulate the statistical properties of those words. It cannot and will not tell us anything new

It doesn’t “know” anything. It can’t solve that problem. It’s trained on humans so it’s limited to what we have written down.

I love ChatGPT but if it’s creative it’s because you asked it the right questions and found an oblique answer yourself.

I asked Bard how ChatGPT can fix itself, here's what it said:

ChatGPT can fix itself in a number of ways, including:

Retraining on a larger dataset. ChatGPT is trained on a massive dataset of text and code, but it can always be retrained on a larger dataset. This would help ChatGPT to learn new things and improve its performance.

Using a different algorithm. ChatGPT is currently trained using the GPT-3 algorithm, but there are other algorithms that could be used. For example, ChatGPT could be trained using the Megatron-Turing NLG algorithm, which is one of the most powerful language models in the world.

Using a combination of algorithms. ChatGPT could also be trained using a combination of algorithms. This would allow ChatGPT to benefit from the strengths of different algorithms.

Using a feedback loop. ChatGPT could be used to generate text, and then this text could be used to train ChatGPT. This would allow ChatGPT to learn from its own mistakes and improve its performance over time.

Using human feedback. ChatGPT could also be used to generate text, and then this text could be reviewed by humans. The human feedback could then be used to improve ChatGPT's performance.

It's working on it. It's just a pretty difficult task to be better than 50 years of optimization by human computer scientists https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01883-4

$7 million a day!?

Edit: it seems that is approximately correct. Wow

They seems to be killing Cortana... So I expect a new assistant at least based partially on this tbh.

It seems to be a common thing. I gave up on /r/futurology and /r/technology over on Reddit long ago because it was filled with an endless stream of links to cool new things with comment sections filled with nothing but negativity about those cool new things. Even /r/singularity is drifting that way. And so it is here on the Fediverse too, the various "technology" communities are attracting a similar userbase.

Sure, not everything pans out. But that's no excuse for making all of these communities into reflections of /r/nothingeverhappens. Technology does change, sometimes in revolutionary ways. It'd be nice if there was a community that was more upbeat about that.

Because it's just the same as autocomplete on your phone lol so whatevs.

/s

People are scared because it will make consolidation of power much easier, and make many of the comfyer jobs irrelevant. You can't strike for better wages when your employer is already trying to get rid of you.

The idealist solution is UBI but that will never work in a country where corporations have a stranglehold on the means of production.

Hunger shouldn't be a problem in a world where we produce more food with less labor than anytime in history, but it still is, because everything must have a monetary value, and not everyone can pay enough to be worth feeding.

I probably sound like I hate it, but I'm just giving my annual "this new tech isn't the miracle it's being sold as" warning, before I go back to charging folks good money to clean up the mess they made going "all in" on the last one.

Hacker News

I was also curious about that, chatgpt says hacker news and that makes sense to me.

It works if you ask it for small specific components, the bigger the scope of the request, the less likely it will give you anything worthwhile.

So basically you still need to know what you're doing and how to design a script/program anyway, and you're just using chatgpt to figure out the syntax.

It's a bit of time-saver at times but it's not replacing anyone in the immediate future.

I've tried using it myself and the responses I get, no matter how I phrase them, are too vague in most places to be useful. I have yet to get anything better than what I've found in documentation.

It's shit on because it is not actually AI as the general public tends to use the term. This isn't Data from Star Trek, or anything even approaching Asimov's three laws.

The immediate defense against this statement is people going into mental gymnastics and hand waving about "well we don't have a formal definition for intelligence so you can't say they aren't" which is just... nonsense rhetorically because the inverse would be true as well. Can't label something as intelligent if we have no formal definition either. Or they point at various arbitrary tests that ChatGPT has passed and claim that clearly something without intelligence could never have passed the bar exam, in complete and utter ignorance of how LLMs are suited to those types of problem domains.

Also, I find that anyone bringing up the limitations and dangers is immediately lumped into this "AI haters" group like belief in AI is some sort of black and white religion or requires some sort of idealogical purity. Like having honest conversations about these systems' problems intrinsically means you want them to fail. That's BS.

Machine Learning and Large Language Models are amazing, they're game changing, but they aren't magical panaceas and they aren't even an approximation of intelligence despite appearances. LLMs are especially dangerous because of how intelligent they appear to a layperson, which is why we see everyone rushing to apply them to entirely non-fitting use cases as a race to be the first to make the appearance of success and suck down those juicy VC bux.

Anyone trying to say different isn't familiar with the field or is trying to sell you something. It's the classic case of the difference between tech developers/workers and tech news outlets/enthusiasts.

The frustrating part is that people caught up in the hype train of AI will say the same thing: "You just don't understand!" But then they'll start citing the unproven potential future that is being bandied around by people who want to keep you reading their publication or who want to sell you something, not any technical details of how these (amazing) tools function.

At least in my opinion that's where the negativity comes from.

Ah, yes.

Remind me again how that "revolution of human mobility", the Segway, is doing now...

Or how wanderful every single one the announcements of breakthroughs in Fusion generation have turned out to be...

Or how the safest Operating System ever, Windows 7, turned out in terms of security..

Or how Bitcoin has revolutionized how people pay each other for stuff...

Some of us have seen lots of hype trains go by over the years, always with the same format and almost all of them originating from exactly the same subset of people as the AI one, and recognize the salesspeak from greedy fuckers designed to excite ignorant naive fanboys of such bullshit chu-chu-trains when they come to the station.

Rational people who are not driven by "personal profit maximization on the backs of suckers" will not use salesspeak and refer to anything brand new as "the most incredible creation of humanity" (it's way too early to tell) or deem any and all criticism of it as "shitting on it".

AI is not good. I want to be good, but it's not.

I'll clarify, it's basically full of nonsense. Half of the shit it spits out is nonsense, and the rest is questionable. Even with that, it's already being used to put people out of their jobs.

Techbros think AI will run rampant and kill all humans, when they're the ones killing people by replacing them with shitty AI. And the worst part is that it isn't even good at the jobs it's being used for. It makes shit up, it plagiarizes, it spits out nonsense. And a disturbing amount of the internet is starting to become AI generated. Which is also a problem. See, AI is trained on the wider internet, and now AI is being trained on the shitty output of AI. Which will lead to fun problems and the collapse of the AI. Sadly, the jobs taken by AI will not come back.

Not everyone that dislikes a thing or the promoters of that thing "have no idea what it is"...but sure, go off I guess. 🤷

Whenever I think of bots selling to other bots I think of this, with apologies for Youtube.

What?

That has nothing to do with chatgpt or other ai..

The AI craze is much further reaching than an crypto. Reducing it to just crypto is way too simple.

That's not what I said.

Money doesn't mean shit - enshittification is about potential cash flow

uncensored vicuna 7b if i recall

nvidia rtx 3060, 20 core intel cpu, 32gb ram

In terms of flexibility oobabooga's text generation webui is the best as it supports nearly every model as ggml, gptq and transformers.

For the model itself Nous-hermes-llama2 is one the best for easy use.

I actually started my journey into Lewd AI stuff with NovelAI. I stopped using it after awhile because I like chatbot rp specifically, not just something that will finish a story for me. Using Silly Tavern to try and emulate the NovelAI models into acting like chat bots just shows how not good they are at that.

I don’t think it’s at all clear that that’s a viable business strategy in a market where that kind of sleight of hand is as well known as it is right now

Agreed. But it will be a significant loss for a big chunk of people since other LLMs aren’t nearly as good as GPT-4.

A) Not true. Many have been training models using various online data that that doesn't belong to them, has not been licensed, and has been used without informed consent of the rights holders.

B) Terrible comparison. Music sampling is a grey area that is much more complex and dubious than you're suggesting. There are instances in which sampling has been considered fair use, but outside of that there are strict laws around sampling. Finally, human music creation and sampling have very little in common with generative AI.

AI is here to stay. But the free ride of scraping every piece of information in human history without even a basic regard towards intellectual property or personality rights is unsustainable, unethical, and nowhere near the threshold for what can be considered fair use.

Once people start needing to own or license their training data sets the technology will be just fine, but costs will rise dramatically and the VC investment bubble is going to pop bigtime.

What's legal changes. There will absolutely be new ai focused laws enacted just like there were internet focused laws once the Internet became very impactful. We simply have no idea how this will play out. Whatever new laws are passed will definitely not kill ai though since it's a big business and us law makes will want ai companies to thrive so those services can be exported. People acting like ai will die for legal reasons are completely off base.

Why shouldn’t I root for the destruction of a technology who’s proponents openly gloat will be used to my detriment?