zlacker

>>convex+(OP)
This is Olek Madry and Jakub Pachocki we are talking about. Check out their respective dblps if you don't get it. It's a kind of loss that will be hard to recover from.

In relation to other comments here. There is "coding" and there is "God's spark genius of algorithms" kind of work. This is what made the magic of OpenAI. Believe me, those guys were not "just coding". My bet is that it could be all about some research directions that were "shielded" by Sam.

>>suziem+Uy
If all of that would be enough, there would be a ChatGPT from Google, a long time ago...

>>belter+Qz
Google invented the core technology, and they had an internal version long before ChatGPT was released. I joined when it was already at the "accessible to all employees" stage and it absolutely blew my mind.

They just hadn't -- and still haven't -- figured out how to commercialize it yet. I don't think they'll be the ones to crack that nut either. IMO they are too obsessed with "safety" to release something useful, and also can't reasonably deploy a service like ChatGPT at their scale because the costs are too high.

With OpenAI imploding this whole race just got a lot more interesting though...

>>sbroth+NP
I remember seeing short stories generated back in 2020 and they were sort of cool but not that great.

Scaling of training was the challenge back then (of course).

Google was already too corporate. Please remember that Sergey Brin and Larry Page were no longer at the steering wheel back then. I have been told that it was also a cultural issue linked to "delivering brilliance". Simplifying: Google promoted tiny teams or individual contributors building things that had to become a massive success quickly. Open AI took a number of hand picked brilliant people and let them work together on a common goal, silently, for quite some time.

Some companies just have an unfair advantage. A certain magic. And OpenAI's magic is at risk right now.