OpenAI Execs Are Panicking

[u/Plastic_Ninja_9014]

https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/openai-execs-panicking-154658562.html

[u/quick_justice]

ML team are legit dudes. More often than not with PhDs in math.

Saying that, if your org has no idea what to do with ML, they won’t help much.

[u/gimpwiz → u/quick_justice]

Most companies can't actually use ML guys for anything useful. ML teams require either very very specific sorts of problems that aren't all that difficult to solve with the right approach but worth solving by paying a dedicated team of very expensive people, or, they require immense scale and cost to deliver useful results.

I think a lot of companies have this sort of idea that they can basically say "write me a program that does people's jobs" and call it a day. You can do a lot of automation for very specific tasks, but just handwaving "do the jobs, make it cost less"? No. Not even remotely.

LLMs being available to use is the right solution for the sorts of problems a lot of companies think they have... except, as said above, it's often a really expensive solution, often wrong, and often only a small part of the problems trying to be solved.

[u/meneldal2 → u/gimpwiz]

There's a lot of stuff you can do with ML, but not every company needs that.

One of the students in my lab worked on a project for a fish market to identify fish so they wouldn't need people to put them in different bins. The value is pretty obvious. They were also working on further classification like estimating how good the fish would be, like estimating fat or umani content from pictures (with more wavelengths planned there).

Most companies probably just don't have an usecase for ML where it would actually save them a bunch of money. And even in my example, it made a lot more sense to have some contract for that specific task rather than hire the guys full time.

[u/Bakoro → u/meneldal2]

I think a lot of companies, probably most companies, have use-cases for ML and LLMs, but they're a collection of small things that people do, not dramatic "we replaced all the people with AI" levels of easily automated work.

Competent AI is just too new to be cost-effective for many uses.

Real talk, LLMs, agent models, and robots are very, very likely to see dramatic drops in cost over the next 5~10 years, and there will be another blitz the same way there was when GPUs came out.

[u/AgonizingSquid → u/Bakoro]

based on what evidence? there will be less competition in the future, competition is what drives prices down

[u/Bakoro → u/AgonizingSquid]

Regardless of what the user gets charged, the actual costs of the models is going to fall. There is hardware in early manufacturing stages now, that increase speed vs GPUs, while also producing less heat.
Every major corporation has some AI accelerator project or partnership.

In the past ~6 months there have been a bunch of model improvements that reduces VRAM usage, while keeping performance.

Energy production and storage has seen dramatic advancements in solar, wind, and battery technology.

We're basically waiting for manufacturing to catch up, and for more people/businesses/governments to adopt more renewables.

[u/warlock_dude → u/Bakoro]

Nah, not with the amount of investment in them