this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
487 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

60115 readers
2822 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is in talks with investors, including from the United Arab Emirates, to raise between $5 trillion to $7 trillion in funding. The goal, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal, is to increase the world's chip manufacturing capacity and enhance AI capabilities.

The fundraising efforts are part of a broader strategy to address OpenAI's growth constraints, particularly the scarcity of AI chips needed for training large language models like ChatGPT.

Altman's proposal is said to include forming a partnership with investors, chip manufacturers, and power providers to finance the construction of chip foundries, which would then be operated by the chip manufacturers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] keefshape@lemmy.ca 51 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (7 children)

Holy fucking bonkers when you put it that way. Like holy fuck.

Are they that close to something amazing, or is Altman going true Dr Evil megalomaniac?

[–] whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

It's both. Basically, if he's right that this is among the most important tech in world history and deserves $7 trillion in research, it'll make OpenAI the du jour monopolist over said most important tech in world history if he gets it. Outright dystopian.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Generative AI is not an important development. General AI would be. This is just a party trick.

[–] whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yeah, AI's been a whole field for many decades, machine learning and deep learning is a whole field that existed and was doing tons of interesting work across a variety of domains before transformers came out. Fully agreed that LLM's are a party trick, but companies use party tricks to gin up interest and money for their real work all the time. None of this changes the fact that AI is important technology.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's also open source too. With faster chips and standard training sets, it will be trivial for anyone to train a basic AI to recognize fire hydrants or whatever. Just like with computers, the "revolution" will not be one giant company but every business using their own.

Your fridge only needs to recognize food items. It doesn't need any more intelligent software. I want a food recognition AI and cameras in the fridge and cabinets so I know what food I need to buy. This doesn't even need live cameras (for power consumption, privacy, and storage). It can just take a picture and analyze it when the door opens, then delete the picture.

[–] datavoid@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sorry what's all open source?

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Llms. There are very competitive, fully open source models.

Openai is not.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Generative AI pales in importance compared to General AI but it is still an important development on its own.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Read the last paragraph of the OP at least. This is not asking for $5 trillion to be handed solely to OpenAI to go become a world monopoly on chip manufacture. What he’s really asking is for investors to direct funds to radically increasing world compute capacity, to the profit for the chip manufacturers and likely many others. OpenAI just gets to continue the track it’s on without this constraint. There is nothing here about them monopolistically controlling this entire investment and in fact the opposite is true: it’s framed as a broad partnership venture.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They're as close as theranos was, just need the money and "two more years".

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (3 children)

theranos never changed the world, openai already has

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Eh, not really in a positive way yet. I use it for quick code snippets but it’s not all that important compared to the fact that misuse of generative A.I. is making so much information on the Internet completely worthless. I don’t think the trade-offs have been worth anything we’ve seen yet.

I’m bullish about a lot of generative A.I. use cases long term but they haven’t accomplished much positive yet and there’s still major, major scaling issues that may not be solved soon. It could easily be like self driving cars where progress stagnates. A lot of times with software, the first 80% is easy and the last 20% takes a decade longer than people expect.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I use it for quick code snippets but it’s not all that important compared to the fact that misuse of generative A.I. is making so much information on the Internet completely worthless.

To be fair we have scare articles galore every day about how this is all ruining the world and killing artists, because fear sells. Meanwhile millions of people like you and me are quietly using this tool to improve our work.

When we compare the relative weight of the two, let’s take the media scare avalanche out of it and just use our personal experiences to judge. I am currently being measurably helped by genAI, and not measurably hurt by it. I just read articles daily about how I’m going to be killed in my sleep by in any second now…

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That change has mostly br a bunch of empty promises. There is no AI yet, there is machine learning, which is just an ingredient. As impressive as they are, they're mostly useless

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Machine learning is AI

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't know if creating and tying yourself to a bubble that's inevitably going to burst is exactly a great way to change the world.

[–] restingboredface@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

It's a great way to make a fat pile of cash though.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

It may not be bonkers at all though. If we look at it as taking money and food out of people’s mouths for a year then yes it’s a lot. But how much free investment capital is there in the world at any given time? Wealth has been accumulating and accumulating in rich people’s investment portfolios for ever and ever. How many Trillions get allocated in any given year? All Altman is saying is that he wants 5 of those to be allocated here and not somewhere else. It’s not necessarily taking rice out of any children’s mouths.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

is Altman going true Dr Evil megalomaniac?

"Ahh fuck it. Let's just hijack a nuclear weapon and hold the world hostage."

[–] Eggyhead@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

These days Dr. Evil would still get laughed at for demanding the $100 billion.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

For being too high or being too low, like when he asked for a million dollars?

[–] Eggyhead@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

For being too low.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

They are that close to cocaine.

[–] Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Ye and he wants it for a fucking chatbot.