Suppose someone wants to play this game, what's the point? Not to mention the fact that Gnome, even though is not a GNU project, literally means GNU Network Object Model Environment.
Why do you think so? This game can be played forever, you just need strong marketing and orgs gullible enough to pay a higher price for a minor upgrade.
> As it turns out, when someone (your wife) gets arrested and tells you to do "whatever you need to do" and "move whatever you need to move at the house", it is highly illegal to then proceed to do so.
If it was my wife, I'd probably do my best to save her.
> Actually USSR pushed a lot of soft power and spent real money behind it. Especially the authors whose narratives didn't directly violate the narrative of the Party.
Do you have any sources for that? I'd like to read about it.
One of the problems is that the term itself got muddled to the point of becoming almost meaningless. It covers anything from pattern recognition, classification, to diffusion models. But the fact remains that many people have a love/hate relationship with LLMs.
OTOH... We know these plans are heavily subsidized, and we're happy to use them to the limits. At some point they will run out of investor money and will have to readjust. Do you think people using the existing plans will switch to per-API-call payments? Or, how many of them will?
Given enormous competition and good progress on the part of the Chinese and open models, I'd say let's enjoy the situation while it lasts. It's like chap Uber drives a decade ago subsidized by Saudi money. I have no sympathy neither for sama/amodei nor people who invest in their companies, and happy to use their resources in this crazy show where everybody pretends something and pushes their own agenda.
I'd say it's almost impossible at that point. Specifically, Altman said so many lies in the past that people stopped believing anything he says.
I think the core of this distrust is the fact that these companies positioned themselves against humanity from the start by saying people will lose most jobs etc. Not only it didn't happen, but many people feel several aspects of their lives got worse because of LLMs, in spite of obvious advantages. So the distrust and reluctance are real.
> People think otherwise with AI partly because Anthropic kept telling us that they didn't have to write code or review code any more for most of their work. Their agent swarms just comb through their github, slack and wikis to figure out what to do next, and another swarm of agents just review, test, merge, deploy, A/B test, and revert the code. Boris alone merged nearly 300 PRs in the past week (or two?).
Apart from many other issues with this, heavily subsidized subscription plans won't last forever, and if you start burning your own money on tokens in this way, you'll soon realize it's terribly inefficient.
As it happens in large orgs, with mixed results. The biggest irony being the whole Transformer architecture being actually conceived at Google, only to be implemented as a product/service by another company.
Well, many people don't have very warm feelings for American LLM providers so they don't care. (Which matters because, at least anecdotally, they do care when buying a new car.)
But you're mentioning several things that predate the current LLM craze and belong to the ML domain. These mostly benefit from GPUs but often have much lower hardware requirements. I'm talking specifically about the moat of LLM providers.