←back to thread

Microsoft and OpenAI's close partnership shows signs of fraying

(www.nytimes.com)
321 points jhunter1016 | 2 comments | 18 Oct 24 11:11 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
WithinReason ◴[18 Oct 24 12:04 UTC] No.41878604[source]▶
Does OpenAI have any fundamental advantage beyond brand recognition?
replies(15): >>41878633 #>>41878979 #>>41880635 #>>41880834 #>>41881554 #>>41881647 #>>41881720 #>>41881764 #>>41881926 #>>41882221 #>>41882479 #>>41882695 #>>41883076 #>>41883128 #>>41883207 #
mock-possum ◴[18 Oct 24 17:47 UTC] No.41881764[source]▶
Does Kleenex?

I’ve heard plenty of people call any chatbot “chat gpt” - it’s becoming a genericized household name.

replies(3): >>41881826 #>>41882253 #>>41882417 #
aksss ◴[18 Oct 24 17:54 UTC] No.41881826[source]▶
What’s the killer 2-syllable word (google, Kleenex)??

ChatGPT is a mouthful. Even copilot rolls off the tongue easier though doesn’t have the mindshare obviously.

Generic gpt would be better but you end up saying gpt-style tool, which is worse.

replies(5): >>41882178 #>>41882587 #>>41882850 #>>41883053 #>>41883152 #
1. sorenjan ◴[18 Oct 24 18:34 UTC] No.41882178[source]▶
I think it shows really well how OpenAI was caught off guard when Chat GPT got popular and proved to be unexpectedly useful for a lot of people. They just gave it a technical name for what it was, a Generative Pre-trained Transformer model that was fine tuned for chat style interaction. If they had any plans on making a product close to what it is today they would have given it a catchier name. And now they're kind of stuck with it.
replies(1): >>41883063 #
2. jazzyjackson ◴[18 Oct 24 20:16 UTC] No.41883063[source]▶
I agree but otoh it distinguishes itself as a new product class better than if they had gave it a name like Siri, Alexa, Gemini, Jeeves