One thing I suspect investors in e.g. OpenAI are failing to price in is the political and regulatory headwinds OpenAI will face if their fantastical revenue projections actually materialize. A world where OpenAI is making $100B in annual revenue will likely be a world where technological unemployment looms quite clearly. Polls already show strong support for regulating AI.
I'm trying to think of whether it'd be worth starting some kind of semi-Luddite community where we can use digital technology, photos, radios, spreadsheets and all, but the line is around 2014, when computers still did the same thing every time. That's my biggest gripe with AI, the nondeterminism, the non-repeatability making it all undebuggable, impossible to interrogate and reason about. A computer in 2014 is complex but not incomprehensible. The mass matrix multiplication of 2024 computation is totally opaque and frankly I think there's room for a society without such black box oracles.
> Or 2019 for ChatGPT 2
That wasn't ChatGPT, that was GPT-2. It wasn't even designed for "chat" and was purely text completion. If you tried to ask it a question, it was a toss-up over whether you'd get an answer or just a bunch of related questions and statements, as if it was part of what a single speaker was saying.
Like, you could prompt it with "I'm here to talk about" and it would complete it with some random subject.
I don't even know if any of the well-known LLMs (Mistral, Llama, what else?)can even operate in this mode now. Seems they're all being designed for being an assistant.