They don't have to match the market leader, they just have to be "good enough".
There are oodles of use-cases where sending your data to an outside provider is a complete no-go. In these cases OpenAI/Google/whoever-products aren't relevant competition.
Part of the problem is that "good enough" can be really difficult to figure out, whereas GPT-3.5 (and of course GPT-4) are almost a guaranteed success with just basic prompting and context fed in via the prompt.
And yes, there are indeed use cases where sending data to an outside provider is a no-go. The bet OpenAI is making is that they can solve for that later while building their business on use cases where it's fine to send data to an outside parameter. It may also simply not be something they care about. In my own work I know of a massive financial enterprise that has prioritized ~30 or so features where it's fine to send that data. OpenAI is not struggling to get their money.
It remains to be seen if OpenAI will also capture this market, or if fine-tuning open models to be "good enough" wins out over time. The point isn't that, though. The point is that their models are so broadly applicable that _anyone_ can get some value quickly without much work.
I keep hearing this, but which company has this policy? The privacy policy of openAI's enterprise(or Azure's) is not a lot different than say AWS, which everyone uses.
"These actions clearly put confidential information at risk, prompting Samsung to warn its employees about the dangers of using ChatGPT. Samsung Electronics informed its executives and employees that data entered into ChatGPT is transmitted and stored on external servers, making it impossible for the company to retrieve it and increasing risks of confidential information leakage."
"Samsung Electronics informed its executives and employees that data entered into ChatGPT is transmitted and stored on external servers, making it impossible for the company to retrieve it and increasing risks of confidential information leakage."
Well yeah, they were an entertainment show, not a research institute but I doubt you'll find anyone refuting their find though.
It's a known fact better looking people get treated better by their fellow clothed apes in all walks of life, including and especially, service industry work.
I feel in many parts of the US it is now expected, if not demanded.
This is bullshit. If your business model doesn't work without tips, you need to raise the base prices. And in pubs and bars and such you need to pay your staff a proper wage.
> If Matter can succeed in convincing companies to compete on the merits of their devices—not the incidental revenue that comes from being a single-system device provider, or phone app marketing...
...then in a few years, people won't even notice that they're simply scanning a code on their devices and adding them to whatever home control system they wish.
The sentence you (partially) quote starts with "if" and ends with "wish". Cough.
One of the early customers was the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, so, wild guess, they probably used it for medium-range weather forecasts.
FWiW Australia used a CDC Cyber 205 for occassional weather modelling and other mathematical work in the early 1980s.
( There was a seperate dedicated weather computer, this one was used for 'other' jobs like speculative weather modelling, monster group algebraic fun, et al.)
In 1980, the successor to the Cyber 203, the Cyber 205 was announced. The UK Meteorological Office at Bracknell, England was the first customer and they received their Cyber 205 in 1981.
Numerically, I’m currently what this would have looked like. I’m talking about the governing equation set, discretization methods, data, etc. It would be a fun project to try and implement a toy model like that.
> It would be a fun project to try and implement a toy model like that.
If you really want a challenge, do it using pen, paper and a slide rule, like in the old days[1]. Just make sure to apply appropriate smoothing of the input data first[2].
Elena Buckley can write; this was a well written text. But I didn't find anything much interesting in the writing. Sad.
I think this will be the only bit I remember:
[Fifteen-year-old] Landon thought for a second and nodded. “I do think the Sphere is cool,” he said, looking me in the eye. “But it means more light pollution. I’m trying to see the stars.”
The light pollution from Vegas is wild. My buddy and I were heading towards Las Vegas from Boise on 15 about 20 years ago and, at around 2:00 am, I thought I was hallucinating because it appeared that the sun was rising. It took us a few seconds to realize it was the lights of Vegas… because we were still nearly 70 miles away.
the "significant societal changes" are immigration.
as you can't change the birth rate overnight, and even if you could, it would take ~20years for the kids to begin earning, there needs to be a short-term solution. and that is immigration.
good thing immigration is so popular in rich western societies at the moment.
The problem is when the country can- or does not have any influence of what kind of immigrants they get. Not every country can get the best. In the case of Denmark for example, the immigration has been shown a net negative[0]. And you have to admit it is weird to live in a society with a self destructing culture, where foreigners are used as breading rabbits.
If they aren't qualified, then you have to train them. If they don't have your values, you have to integrate them. That is complicated, takes a lot of effort and costs a lot of money. Everyone who thinks anything about the problem is cheap or easy is delusional.
What is the alternative? Just let the population age?
There are oodles of use-cases where sending your data to an outside provider is a complete no-go. In these cases OpenAI/Google/whoever-products aren't relevant competition.