| |
| ▲ | erikerikson an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | The tone on this could be improved. They literally answered your question "What lead?" and you seem dismissive. | | |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 41 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, you're right, maybe needlessly harsh, sorry for that. I guess I'm tired of the same argument that Google somehow had a lead in LLM development because Transformer comes from researchers who worked at Google, yet somehow what comes before/after Transformer doesn't count, coming from Google's researchers (BERT) or others (GPT), or going even earlier so, hence the whole "we stand on the shoulders of giants". | | |
| ▲ | HDThoreaun 34 minutes ago | parent [-] | | We can go round and round about all this but I think it's pretty clear that google did at one point have a large AI lead in the lead up to covid. They had models that far surpassed the competition from 2018-2022. But they were facing an innovators dilemma, didnt want to cannibalize their search revenue so they sat on LLMs which ended up creating openAI and anthropic. |
|
| |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | kllrnohj an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Great, tell me again who put the Transformer into LLMs? Google did, as they already said. OpenAI was better at marketing and a lot more willing to cannibalize the search market as a newcomer. So Google blew their lead in research by not recognizing the product value quickly enough, or failing to win an internal political war on it anyway |
|
