←back to thread

492 points Lionga | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.251s | source
Show context
Rebuff5007 ◴[] No.45673440[source]
From a quick online search:

- OpenAI's mission is to build safe AI, and ensure AI's benefits are as widely and evenly distributed as possible.

- Google's mission is to organise the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.

- Meta's mission is to build the future of human connection and the technology that makes it possible.

Lets just take these three companies, and their self-defined mission statements. I see what google and openai are after. Is there any case for anyone to make inside or outside Meta that AI is needed to build the future of human connection? What problem is Meta trying to solve with their billions of investment in "super" intelligence? I genuinely have no idea, and they probably don't either. Which is why they would be laying of 600 people a week after paying a billion dollars to some guy for working on the same stuff.

EDIT: everyone commenting that mission statements are PR fluff. Fine. What is a productive way they can use LLMs in any of their flagship products today?

replies(19): >>45673534 #>>45673569 #>>45673578 #>>45673581 #>>45673583 #>>45673603 #>>45673716 #>>45673858 #>>45673905 #>>45673939 #>>45673979 #>>45674097 #>>45674105 #>>45674121 #>>45674124 #>>45674319 #>>45674664 #>>45674757 #>>45675885 #
scrollop ◴[] No.45673603[source]
Why are you asking questions about their PR department coordinated "Company missions"?

Let me summarise their real missions:

1. Power and money

2. Power and money

3. Power and money

How does AI help them make money and gain more power?

I can give you a few ways...

replies(8): >>45673671 #>>45673703 #>>45673722 #>>45673740 #>>45673834 #>>45674159 #>>45674443 #>>45674541 #
iknowstuff ◴[] No.45673703[source]
To be even more specific, the company making money is merely a proxy for the actual goal: increased valuation for stockowners. Subtle but very significant difference
replies(1): >>45673772 #
hinkley ◴[] No.45673772[source]
Because a CEO with happy shareholders has more power. The shareholder value thing is a sop, and sometimes a dangerous one.

We keep trying to progressively tax money in the US to reduce the social imbalance. We can’t figure out how to tax power and the people with power like it that way. If you have power you can get money. But it’s also relatively straightforward to arrange to keep the money that you have.

But they don’t really need to.

replies(2): >>45674086 #>>45676367 #
1. goalieca ◴[] No.45676367[source]
> We keep trying to progressively tax money in the US to reduce the social imbalance.

The former does not lead to the latter.