> I don’t think that a glitzy marketing campaign with a positive spin (which some have advocated that Anthropic do) is the way to win back that trust — at this point, saying that AI will cure cancer is more a cliche than it is inspiring, and most people think it is deceptive. The thing that will work is actually curing cancer.
Then, proceeds at promising it again, without delivering. Amazing.
> We are however doing our best to fix this: Anthropic is ramping up its efforts very quickly in biology and medicine, and we hope to have incredible results in the coming years and some early glimmers in the coming months. When we’ve actually accomplished something real, the whole world will hear about it, as loudly as possible, you have my word on that.
They also have colder beers than Germany probably for the same reason. Nothing beats the culture acclimation of wincing while sipping lukewarm beer under the July sun in 100+ degrees Berlin.
I'm not sure if the copy is also AI generated but I felt the same as the other commenter when reading it, although maybe I was influenced by the looks.
Which, by analogy, would mean you could use subsided tokens for over 10 years and then, and only then, actually purchase your own hardware to do inference, with over a decade of technological advancements to compound.
I'll invest in inference hardware whenever the economics make sense, not because of my prediction that prices will get higher (also, because smaller models keep getting better and they might just suffice for most of my use cases in a few years time).
My biggest worries in terms of cost is in regards to training. Whenever that gets too expensive for Beijing to pay, we won't be getting new SOTA open small models to run on local hardware, which, again, reinforces the decision to use providers for AI inference for now.
> Whenever that gets too expensive for Beijing to pay, we won't be getting new SOTA open small models to run on local hardware, which, again, reinforces the decision to use providers for AI inference for now.
Valid takeaway.
"Invest" in the companies that release their models, because the alternative is to reward the people who will capture the market and jack up the prices to unreasonable level.
Unfortunately I think this is a bit like game theory, people will choose the local optimum despite the long term problems with doing so.
I suppose they can advertise a 0.9x Wh battery and include a 1x Wh battery instead, which is fine for me. If the battery is going to degrade hard just give me one that only reaches 90% max.
This is probably what Apple is going to do, soft limit the battery to not charge to 100% yet still report 100% in the UI. Many android devices and laptops have such a setting these days already. For some it might not be nice to see 80% after a night's charge, hence the UI fakery I'm suggesting.
My old 2018 Hyundai Kona EV did the same thing: officially it was a 64kWh battery, yet when you count the cells they come out at 71kWh or something. They built in some margin to extend battery life as capacity declines. Coïncidentally this also meant that regen braking worked even when the battery was 100%. The car is at 110,000km and the BMS still reports 100% SoH.
Edit: In the OpenAI blog I meant to say