> My "guess" is they're offering $1B worth of Azure services. Which costs MSFT probably much less than $1B.
It's a cash investment. We certainly do plan to be a big Azure customer though.
> My "guess" is that it means MSFT has access to sell products based off the research OpenAI does to MSFT's customers. Having early access to advanced research means MSFT could easily make this money back by selling better AI tools to their customers.
I'm flattered that you think our research is that valuable! (As I say in the blog post: we intend to license some of our pre-AGI technologies, with Microsoft becoming our preferred partner for commercializing them.)
OpenAI has achieved some amazing results and I congratulate them for their accomplishments, but labeling any of that as "pre-AGI" is intellectually dishonest and misleading at best. They haven't shown any meaningful progress toward true AGI.
When I was 10 I created some "pre-time travel" technology by designing an innovative control panel for my time machine. Sadly I ran into some technical obstacles later in the project. OpenAI is at about the same phase with AGI.
Sorry for the cowardice of this throwaway account, but it freaks me out that Musk left, and Thiel is still there.
Going back in time:
> Musk has joined with other Silicon Valley notables to form OpenAI, which was launched with a blog post Friday afternoon. The group claimed to have the goal “to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return.”
What happened here?
I know it’s far off, but I am concerned about AGI misanthropy and the for-profit turn of OpenAI. Who is the humanist anchor, of Elon’s gravitas, left at OpenAI?
What happened to the original mission? Are any of you concerned about this? Can you get rid of Peter Thiel please? Can we buy him out as a species? I respect the man’s intellect yet truly fear his misanthropy and influence.
Apologies for the rambling, but you all got me freaked out a bit. I had, and still do have such high hopes for OpenAI.
Why? He left due to possible conflict of interest, Tesla is researching AI for self-driving vehicles and it wouldn't surprise me if SpaceX does at some point too (assuming they aren't already).
If your team ever gets frustrated by ARM, have them shoot me an email for my old proposal on how to fix it (source: used to work at Azure and perennially frustrated by ARM design)
Can I say "most of them"? Basically it simplifies ARM and the Azure API significantly and makes Azure operate more like "infrastructure as code". But I'd need to look at the latest version of Azure to see specifically what the remaining pain points are now. I could have a more specific conversation in a different setting.
I remember the first meetings about ARM when the resource IDs were presented, and a few people immediately asked "what if someone wants to rename a resource"? Years later you still could not do that (I'm hoping they've fixed that by now?).
It seemed to me that ARM was the result of some design by super smart committee, and got a lot wrong. When I was there more senior folks told me not to worry, that's just the Microsoft way (wait for version 3). I do have to admit that it's turning out they knew more than me (shocking!), as over time I've seen some of the stuff that was inexplicably terrible in v1 become much, much better in later versions.
If you manually rename a resource and refer to it by resource ID, I don't think ARM understands anything about it and assumes it's a new resource. That's just from using ARM, though, I don't know it's internals.
They are investing a good amount in ARM lately though. The vs code language server is pretty good and export template got much better
It's a cash investment. We certainly do plan to be a big Azure customer though.
> My "guess" is that it means MSFT has access to sell products based off the research OpenAI does to MSFT's customers. Having early access to advanced research means MSFT could easily make this money back by selling better AI tools to their customers.
I'm flattered that you think our research is that valuable! (As I say in the blog post: we intend to license some of our pre-AGI technologies, with Microsoft becoming our preferred partner for commercializing them.)