Least shocking news ever. This has clearly been in the works for a while. Not that it’ll matter at this point, given that the notion of OpenAI making any profit is kind of a pipe dream right now.
This is mostly just a play to get investors to sink more money into covering their absolutely insane cash burn for another year.
Comparitively speaking, a lot less hype than their earlier models produced. Hardcore techies care about incremental improvements, but the average user does not. If you try to describe to the average user what is “new” about GPT-4, other than “It fucks up less”, you’ve basically got nothing.
And it’s going to carry on like this. New models are going to get exponentially more expensive to train, while producing less and less consumer interest each time, because “Holy crap look at this brand new technology” will always be more exciting than “In our comparitive testing version 7 is 9.6% more accurate than version 6.”
And for all the hype, the actual revenue just isn’t there. OpenAI are bleeding around $5-10bn (yes, with a b) per year. They’re currently trying to raise around $11bn in new funding just to keep the lights on. It costs far more to operate these models (even at the steeply discounted compute costs Microsoft are giving them) than anyone is actually willing to pay to use them. Corporate clients don’t find them reliable or adaptable enough to actually replace human employees, and regular consumers think they’re cool, but in a “nice to have” kind of way. They’re not essential enough a product to pay big money for, but they can only be run profitably by charging big money.
It’s not really that Concord was bad, and more that it was unremarkable.
The game was trying so hard to be a clone of Overwatch that what they ended up with was the gaming equivalent of those knock-off GI Joe clones your mother would buy you from the dollar store. Except that Overwatch is free, and Concord was $40. Why am I going to spend more money on getting the knock-off version?
Copying what works only gets you so far. At some point, you have to actually step ahead of the thing you’re copying.
OK, interesting. I’m a little unclear on how they’re calculating rMax and rPeak though?
I would really want a measure of actual compute power, like teraflops per capita or something. Still imperfect, but better than just counting the number of buildings.
Personally I think it’d be interesting to see this per capita, so here’s my back of a napkin math for data centers per 1 million pop (c. 2022):
Worth noting of course that this only lists the quantity of discrete data centers and says nothing about the capacity of those data centers. I think it’d be really interesting to break down total compute power and total storage by country and by population.
I’d also be interested to know what qualifies as a “data center”? For example, are ASIC based crypto mining operations counted, even though their machinery cannot be repurposed to any other function? That would certainly account for a chunk of the the US (almost all of it in Texas).
Genuinely one of the all time best Black Mirror episodes
“Drink verification can to continue…”
For anyone not familiar with this game, or anyone who’s only familiarity is through the trailers (which really focus on tone and visuals), I really want to recommend the videos by YouTuber Riloe, who has been playing early builds with the devs and chatting to them extensively about the game. They’re really well produced videos, and they really help to explain the tone of the game, the interesting mechanical ideas behind it, and what exactly this company is trying to achieve. Obviously, take with a grain of salt, the guy is clearly a fan and these videos aren’t really trying to be critical, so this should all be read as basically press releases;
This antishooter game is beautiful and horrifying
I’m really excited for this game. Not just for the visuals, but for everything they’re doing with the mechanical design. The idea of playing as scavengers trapped between two warring factions is incredibly cool, and based on early previews it sounds like there are a lot of very clever design elements, especially in the AI, all built to back up that core idea. For example enemies intelligently prioritize targets; a tank won’t focus on infantry if there’s an enemy tank present, and even when it does target the infantry it’ll use its machine guns, not the main cannon. Enemies will focus on you if you make yourself the biggest threat, but if you’re smart and follow the flow of battle you can keep their focus elsewhere.
That’s really smart stuff, and by all accounts it works very well. I also really like what the studio is doing more broadly. They’re really trying to push back on a lot of the toxic practices in the gaming industry. I’ll be getting the game day one, mostly just to reward them for trying to do something different.
Read some history mate. The luddites weren’t technophobes either. They hated the way that capitalism was reaping all the rewards of industrializion. They were all for technological advancement, they just wanted it to benefit everyone.
It’s weird how so many of these “technophobes” are IT professionals. Crazy that people would line up to go into a profession they so obviously hate and fear.
Fuck you, that made me smile. And I haven’t even had my coffee yet.
The reasonable way to approach this problem would have been to ask a follow up question, rather than bitching at someone for not answer in the exact format you required. You’re the beggar here, you get zero fucking say in how much or how little people choose to help you.
Fuck that’s cool. You lucky bastard.
Yeah, Saber basically bought themselves back from Embracer (Embracer are desperate for money after they absolutely fucked an investment deal), and in the process bought back a bunch of other companies, including New World Interactive (Insurgency devs) and 3D Realms. They also have an outstanding option to buy 4A and Zen Studios.
No microtransactions
Saber off to a good start after getting themselves out of Embracer. I hope this pays off for them. The game looks great and I’m excited to play it.
Yeah, the immediate problem with comparing gun to non-gun kills is that anything involving a gun is automatically more likely to result in someone dead. So it doesn’t really give you a picture of how Indy likes to approach problems. And once a gun does become the tool of choice in a scene, the body count is likely to rack up a lot faster. You can show five people getting gunned down much faster than you can show one Nazi getting his head propellered off. Guns tend to be how disposable mooks die, but signature enemies get the more elaborate deaths.
I taught myself Python in part by using ChatGPT. Which is to say, I coaxed it through the process of building my first app, while studying from various resources, and using the process of correcting its many mistakes as a way of guiding my studies. And I was only able to do this because I already had a decent grasp of many of the basics of coding. It was honestly an interesting learning approach; looking at bad code and figuring out why it’s bad really helps you to get those little “Aha” moments that make programming fun. But at the end of the day it only serves as a learning tool because it’s an engine for generating incompetent results.
ChatGPT, as a tool for creating software, absolutely sucks. It produces garbage code, and when it fails to produce something usable you need a strong understanding of what it’s doing to figure out where it went wrong. An experienced Python dev could have built in a day what took me and ChatGPT a couple of weeks. My excuse is that I was learning Python from scratch, and had never used an object oriented language before. It has no excuse.
Oh, absolutely. Altman is going to plunder this sinking ship for everything it’s worth, and then bail into a CTO position somewhere else. All the C suite at OpenAI will win big no matter what, everyone else there will get fucked.