| ▲ | Animats 11 hours ago | |||||||
It's stopped being cost-effective. Another order of magnitude of data centers? Not happening. The business question is, what if AI works about as well as it does now for the next decade or so? No worse, maybe a little better in spots. What does the industry look like? NVidia and TSMC are telling us that price/performance isn't improving through at least 2030. Hardware is not going to save us in the near term. Major improvement has to come from better approaches. Sutskever: "I think stalling out will look like…it will all look very similar among all the different companies. It could be something like this. I’m not sure because I think even with stalling out, I think these companies could make a stupendous revenue. Maybe not profits because they will need to work hard to differentiate each other from themselves, but revenue definitely." Somebody didn't get the memo that the age of free money at zero interest rates is over. The "age of research" thing reminds me too much of mid-1980s AI at Stanford, when everybody was stuck, but they weren't willing to admit it. They were hoping, against hope, that someone would come up with a breakthrough that would make it work before the house of cards fell apart. Except this time everything costs many orders of magnitude more to research. It's not like Sutskever is proposing that everybody should go back to academia and quietly try to come up with a new idea to get things un-stuck. They want to spend SSI's market cap of $32 billion on some vague ideas involving "generalization". Timescale? "5 to 20 years". This is a strange way to do corporate R&D when you're kind of stuck. Lots of little and medium sized projects seem more promising, along the lines of Google X. The discussion here seems to lean in the direction of one big bet. You have to admire them for thinking big. And even if the whole thing goes bust, they probably get to keep the house and the really nice microphone holder. | ||||||||
| ▲ | energy123 11 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
The ideas likely aren't vague at all given who is speaking. I'd bet they're extremely specific. Just not transparently shared with the public because it's intellectual property. | ||||||||
| ||||||||