It's been less than 6 months since OpenAI last released a SOTA model architecture that promptly caused every other AI lab to scramble to copy them (o1 preview). Maybe OpenAI is running ashore, but it's too soon to tell yet.
I was going to reply to this snarky comment with a non-snarky reply but I changed my mind, so I will instead laugh riotously at the idea that aviation worked great continuously from its inception to today.
I don't know if Kyle is right but "any good after mainstream public buy-in" and "worked great continuously from inception to today" is quite the goalpost move.
What year do you place “2.5 years after mainstream public buy-in” for aviation? I think you’ll find that in most periods, people with the means were paying a lot for the ability to “get there faster”, despite a bad early safety record. It did work great when it didn’t kill you, and despite that risk it was a hit (for those that could afford it).
Comments
Has there been a single transformative technology that was any good 2.5 years after mainstream public buy-in?
Maxim HMG: Patented 1883, combat use 1886.
Manhattan Project: Started 1942, combat use 1945.
Solid state transistor: Invented 1954, in radios 1955.
Hybrid cars, iPhone, etc etc.
This one nearly replaced Internet search already.
Manhattan project was good before "public buy-in". It was a massive hit on the day of its public release in fact.
No. I think coupling OpenAI's fortunes and the prospects of LLM-native applications is a step too far
It's been less than 6 months since OpenAI last released a SOTA model architecture that promptly caused every other AI lab to scramble to copy them (o1 preview). Maybe OpenAI is running ashore, but it's too soon to tell yet.
Not sure what you mean but yeah basically everything, cars, computers, bitcoin, the internet, airplanes...
I was going to reply to this snarky comment with a non-snarky reply but I changed my mind, so I will instead laugh riotously at the idea that aviation worked great continuously from its inception to today.
I don't know if Kyle is right but "any good after mainstream public buy-in" and "worked great continuously from inception to today" is quite the goalpost move.
What year do you place “2.5 years after mainstream public buy-in” for aviation? I think you’ll find that in most periods, people with the means were paying a lot for the ability to “get there faster”, despite a bad early safety record. It did work great when it didn’t kill you, and despite that risk it was a hit (for those that could afford it).