←back to thread

Microsoft and OpenAI's close partnership shows signs of fraying

(www.nytimes.com)
321 points jhunter1016 | 7 comments | 18 Oct 24 11:11 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
cynicalpeace ◴[18 Oct 24 18:48 UTC] No.41882321[source]▶
I'm betting against OpenAI. Sam Altman has proven himself and his company untrustworthy. In long running games, untrustworthy players lose out.

If you disagree, I would argue you have a very sad view of the world, where truth and cooperation are inferior to lies and manipulation.

replies(17): >>41882351 #>>41882366 #>>41882502 #>>41882707 #>>41882720 #>>41882775 #>>41882946 #>>41883233 #>>41883261 #>>41883435 #>>41883475 #>>41883560 #>>41883612 #>>41883665 #>>41883825 #>>41883868 #>>41884385 #
KPGv2 ◴[18 Oct 24 20:37 UTC] No.41883261[source]▶
> In long running games, untrustworthy players lose out.

Amazon and Microsoft seem to be doing really well for themselves.

replies(1): >>41883387 #
1. Barrin92 ◴[18 Oct 24 20:51 UTC] No.41883387[source]▶
Because they're trustworthy. If you buy a package on Amazon or Craigslist, who do you trust to deliver it to your door tomorrow? People love the trope that their neighbor is trustworthy and the evil big company isn't, but in reality it's exactly the other way around. If you buy your heart medication you buy it from Bayer or an indie startup?

Big, long lived companies excel at delivering exactly what they say they are, and people vote with their wallet on this.

replies(2): >>41883429 #>>41884618 #
2. cynicalpeace ◴[18 Oct 24 20:57 UTC] No.41883429[source]▶
I don't know if Amazon or Microsoft are trustworthy or not.

But I agree with your point. And it gets very ugly when these big institutions suddenly lose trust. They almost always deserve it, but it can upend daily life.

3. justinclift ◴[19 Oct 24 00:20 UTC] No.41884618[source]▶
> Because they're trustworthy.

Amazon are trustworthy?

That's going to be news to the large number of people who've received counterfeit books, dodgy packages, and so on. This is not a new problem:

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=amazon+counterfeit

replies(1): >>41899030 #
4. fastball ◴[20 Oct 24 22:31 UTC] No.41899030[source]▶
And that is Amazon deliberately pawning counterfeits? Or is that other bad actors taking advantage of "Fulfilled by Amazon" infrastructure and its weakpoints?

There is a difference between the two.

replies(1): >>41901597 #
5. justinclift ◴[21 Oct 24 07:31 UTC] No.41901597{3}[source]▶
> There is a difference between the two.

Amazon has been ignoring the problem for a long time, and is well aware of it.

They're so aware of it that I'd personally (not a lawyer though) consider them culpable due to their inaction in making any substantial actions towards fixing the problems.

replies(1): >>41907927 #
6. fastball ◴[21 Oct 24 20:01 UTC] No.41907927{4}[source]▶
How do you know that haven't tried?
replies(1): >>41910067 #
7. justinclift ◴[22 Oct 24 00:40 UTC] No.41910067{5}[source]▶
Would the massive, ongoing counterfeiting problems be something you'd except as evidence of that? :)