Arrogant Big Tech Is Realizing Money Can't Buy Success
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 05. 2024
- FAANG should probably give up on trying to win AI. This might sound like a controversial statement at first glance but when you take a look at the facts, it makes a lot of sense. You see, past performance has been clouding the judgment of these big tech giants. Since they were able to make it big in search social media or email, they think that they can also make it big in AI as long as they spend enough money. But, the reality is that most of these big tech companies haven’t launched a successful hero product in over a decade and the reason is obvious. It’s simply extraordinarily difficult to replicate the success of something like CZcams, Facebook, or WhatsApp. Not to mention, people aren’t exactly fond of these companies or their shady behavior when it comes to privacy and monopolization. This isn’t to say that big tech should leave the AI scene completely though. A smarter choice, however, would be to play a background support role and become a backbone of the industry instead of trying to create the next big thing. This video explains why FAANG is losing in the AI race and how they may be able to turn things around by slightly shifting their focus.
Earn Interest From The Government & Top Corporations:
(iOS App for US Residents)
www.silomarkets.com/waiting-l...
Free Weekly Newsletter With Insiders:
logicallyanswered.substack.com/
Socials:
/ hariharan.jayakumar
Discord Community:
/ discord
Timestamps:
0:00 - FOMO
1:15 - Past Performance
5:13 - Baggage
9:19 - Diversification vs Concentration
Resources:
pastebin.com/eYp7W1Np
Disclaimer:
This video is not a solicitation or personal financial advice. All investing involves risk. Please do your own research.
www.silomarkets.com/disclosures
The next big-thing is regulating those darn mega-tech companies just like any other darn utility
Where’s the EU regulators at hahaha
@@LogicallyAnswered
Hmmmmmm ..... ;
Coup/Comrade/Traitor Trump is the bestest super-secret double-agent the-Dems could ever hope for to single-handedly destroy the-GOP. If Trump's the GOP candidate for president, the-Dems will sweep all 3 branches of gov & then yoor darwinian laissez-faire crazy capitalism is screwed buddy especially mega-tech companies.
@@LogicallyAnsweredthe question is where is US's?
Dunno about the EU, but we broke free and UK restrictions are incoming. EU will probably be "what the UK said" and a bit to make them feel important.
@@MrWillypanda88 they are already bribed
These companies aren't trying to answer the question of what customers want from them, they're just trying to fight each other for control of their customers.
True. Companies that get big like this tend to forget what made them successful in the first place. A hard working and dedicated team with leadership that shows loyalty to them working on a product designed to appeal to the desires of their customer base. The larger they get, the more they bring in people and ask "How can we get this to people who are not yet customers?" instead of asking "How can we continue to appeal to our customers so they tell others how great our product is and market it for us?" Seriously, make a good product and it sells itself. You don't need to then dump millions into marketing, you just need to play to your strengths and let the work speak for itself.
For example, Pepsi and Coca-Cola. For a long time, the soda giants were battling with each other over TV commercials and product placement, trying to appeal to their competitors customer base... but in the end, they realized everyone out there knows them already. Everyone out there either likes a specific brand, dislikes one of them, or just doesn't care which one they get. Restaurants have one or the other and are unlikely to change, and a Pepsi fan is not going to change his mind because he saw a commercial either. This is why you barely see any advertisement anymore for these things.
Twitter wasn't successful because of marketing and convincing people to use it, it was successful because they listened to their customers and gave them what they wanted. Remember when messages were limited to 140 characters? The customers demanded more, and they doubled the length. This change alone brought in a large portion of people who had either quit or were on the fence because they could not express themselves. Their downfall and reason they sold was because they lost sight of this vision, and could no longer accurately give the users what they wanted. You could even say they went too far and started giving in to demands from small groups of users with loud voices rather than supporting the majority of users, and that twisted the space into a warzone because things were changing that the average user didn't want or care about. They started using anti-consumer practices against the everyman while all they cared about were their super popular and wealthy users rather than the majority which outweighs the few.
They've fallen for the idea that people never know what they want and need to be told it
@@maudleyFYI I learned the hard way that people that think this think slavery is a normal part of life they are entitled to exploit. More of us are in jobs that fit the modern day slavery metrics than we realize. When I was sex trafficked I went to look it up and fount out that I worked one intellectual slave job and another labor slave job that led to me being homeless and sex trafficked.
I was shocked to learn that right now there are around 50 million slaves on earth that we estimate. During ALL 400 years of the Atlantic slave trade there were estimated 12-14 million slaves trafficked. It is unreal that they did this while brainwashing most of us to think slavery was over. They really did move the chains from bodies to minds and it is time we break those chains! ⛓️
Have to say Microsoft plays very smart specially in recent years.
That's their whole principle.
Their only loss was windows Phone which they could have done better if they had a better app Store and started early
@@santhoshkumar2270 agree. Even if only they could manage to make the app store better they would have gotten with it.
@@santhoshkumar2270 that was a while ago, I assume they meant even more recent years, since that's what I'd agree with
Great CEO
@@santhoshkumar2270 windows phone was great, problem was the lack of third party support.
In my modest opinion as a big fan of Ready Player One, I LOVE the concept behind it, but I just think Zucc did the worst possible thing - set on fire so much money and had to show for it something that looked like 3 people in a garage with a potato pc and 3000 dollars would make. Maybe starting smaller, making something less ambitious but incredibly good might have saved Meta a shit ton of money while still creating something truly impressive. I know one day a big brain gigachad will come and create The Oasis, but till then, we’ll keep getting disappointed, ig. Won’t even get to see the Zucc vs Musk fight, that was another letdown from our reptil friend
Most charitable explanation is that Zucc's Metaverse has been ridiculously future-proofed and built for ability to scale, all the money went to the back-end and front-end is a crappy placeholder. But this raises the obvious question, why not let the thing cook first before showing it to the public? you can only have one first impression.
Zuckerberg simply had to create the infrastructure for this concept and allowed for individuals to come in and handle the whole direction of meta from design to app interconnectivity. Meta should've been a better Roblox and their focus should've been growing alongside creators who took up the mantle of creating on their platform.
A Ready player one like platform will come to exist but it's going to come slowly and with a lot of cultural milestone driven by consumers and creatives not platforms trying to manufacture that reality.
"Maybe starting smaller, making something less ambitious but incredibly good might have saved Meta a shit ton of money while still creating something truly impressive" You know Second Life has existed for 20 years right?
@@archvaldor I actually didn't, I'll have to document myself about it. Thanks ma boi
You may have missed the point of the book
I worked for a tech giant for a very long time, and Product was so slow and bureaucratic that small companies with 1/10th the development team were able to code circles around them and overtake them. I watched with amazement as a startup competitor came out with in-demand feature after feature while our Product team coded things no one asked for or wanted, and took eons to do it. I feel like Musk has somewhat cracked the code for avoiding this by slashing Twitter down significantly and orienting it like a startup with a new mission. But most big tech companies can’t do that. They should play supporting roles in other tech, but once they start trying to get directly involved in something else they usually fail. They also have to keep their Product team fresh and avoid bloat. Bloat can be useless developers or simply useless job roles. All bloat adds time and cost to innovation.
@@BancheisThat was insightful. Thanks for the comment!
I saw a video of a lead game developer talk about how long it took to write a simple table lookup code/value comparison code, and how it took 4 weeks to do something he could do in a few minutes.
other than some of his rhethoric, i actually like what he is doing
Myspace was the best social media.
There you go 😊
You can literally still use it today, if people would randomly migrate to MySpace others will follow.
I remember trolling randoms there, best times
best?? why dead then?
Your space was just ok
imagine they all worked together and redefined the direction of value of the human condition and abandoned their slavery to the "shareholder" ... health, technology would leap bounds beyond our imagination. Then again... these mushrooms are awesome
Hahaha
You have lost something. You do realise that we live in dead space? The system itself doesn't support abundance for everyone. Two spectrums have to be there for the economy to function.
@@esfasia9835Can you further elaborate
Would you invest, or give your money to such companies?
Bs
Selling shovels rather than prospecting for gold perfectly encapsulates the insights in this video.
Did you know trump’s ancestor started that crap by hiring actors to pretend they found gold and sell shovels?!?!? That family has been harming us since they got here and it’s time we stopped allowing them to abuse their power if you ask me. I was just floored that their crimes started that early. I bet his shovel selling ancestor is very proud of him now….. 🤦♀️
Mine the miners !!!
Woah, That’s meta!!!
The internet is a gentrified ghetto right now. There aren't even any good browsers anymore.
Hardened Firefox bro 🙏
Savage take
Edge is the best browser now, even with the invasion of privacy.
@@millabasset1710 i make a good bit of pocket change from the Microsoft points and it runs video streaming sights better than most. I'll give them that.
@@millabasset1710 not even close
Great video, as always.
I will say though, Google is MUCH MORE risk-averse when it comes to AI.
But make no mistake, they’re ABSOLUTELY a leader in AI research and capability.
I mean…they LITERALLY CREATED the Transformer at Google Labs.
In fact, by releasing the paper “Attention is all you need” and gave it out for free, they effectively enabled EVERY SINGLE STARTUP that utilizes LLMs today.
Google Bard is shit…no doubt about it.
But it’s nowhere even close to being powered by their most powerful model.
Not to mention, they are set to release Gemini, the first LLM built from scratch for multi-modality in the next few months.
..and Gemini 2 is already reportedly in training.
I guess my point is…no one can sleep on the literal creator of the technology that is causing all this mass hysteria.
Google bard was a big stumble for Google.
@@internet_userr they just released there weakest model. It cost to show results, so they are saving money.
I’d also argue and say google is most successful company to use AI. All most all the tools use some form is AI it’s just that it’s not that in your face like chatGPT.
they are justing saving face with bard, i dont know why, recently i tried PALM2 with its API and its a absolute beast, comparable to gpt4 and its logical reason is nearly perfect according to my tests, i even gave it differential equation and the result was correct 4/10 times, got gpt 3.5 its 0/10, for non techies google may not be good but for who are into that space knows how much ahead google is, they literally have the technology more then all the AI startups combined, and via APIs they are giving it for free, and with high rate limit.
The reason I never got into Facebook is that it replaced a platform that could be customized into uniquely individual spaces with a branded uniformity, so that nothing appearing in THEIR space could ever reach highs or lows, and any 'personal' space encountered would never be that personal. It's lasted much longer than I expected, yet I still don't care to give it any of my effort or attention.
Me too
I too remember Geocities. Putting a .midi file in your page and playing music, setting up the page to truly express who you are on a personal level, and essentially working as a virtual introduction to you as if you just gave a business card and speech to a person. It was a great way to be visible on the internet.
I'm only 50. I'm way too young to be on Facebook. My mom uses Facebook.
I'm sorry but you missed the point. It's not the bad reputation of the company that impedes Bard or Threads to thrive, it's the quality of the product. Gpt4 is WAY BETTER than Bard, that's it. Twitter is WAY MORE POPULAR than Threads, that's it.
Truly. Money can't always buy you genuine happiness. It's fleeting, and I mean to say money in this context. People realize it a little too late that being materialistic has its own consequences.
The word "materialistic" is really misused. Life is changing overtime in a fast way, and every X amount of time, another product becomes a must to live. You'll be at a huge disadvantage if you don't purchase the next essential thing.
Like, everyone should have a smartphone, but you don't have to buy a new one every year.
People always forget to attach "overly" before "materialistic". Life is always improved with money - people who claim otherwise are simply spoiled by already having it. The crux is in knowing when to cut back on getting more money and to switch to actually enjoying the benefits it produces in your life.
Google may have worked on AI first, but they failed to be first to the market, and they flopped very badly after rushing to get it out to the market. And worse yet, they proved everyone wrong who claimed that Google was years ahead of the competition and just didn't want to release it yet because it might be a threat to Google Search.
Yup, This video talked a lot about how people were only clowning on Bard because it looked like a copy cat and I'm like l, dude have you actually USED bard? I've used it since launch day and it is nowhere near as good as chatGPT. Like you said Google made bad decisions with AI, and that includes putting out their transformers research for free, which is now the foundation for openAIs entire approach to AI.
I think it's too early to make the conclusion. The race haven't ended yet.
I like google bard, I find it's up-to-date results to be helpful, and I even think the results of the model are slightly better than gpt 3.5 - without paying a penny. Not to mention the drafts feature which is really helpful in many situations.
100% google bard is currently better than chat gpt. I only use Bard. Chat Gpt is an AI that sounds like a lecturer I hated in college. It's a lobotomized AI that's stuck in 2021. You can never compare it to bard. I can give Bard a screen shot of an app and have Bard spit out flutter code for that screen shot. How incredible is that!
@@marilynlucas5128 It's still not as good as GPT4, which does have Internet access as a feature just like bard. It's supposed to be multi-modal as well, at least the API is.
So disappointed that Meta's strides in the OpenAI scene wasn't mentioned in this video
This was a very different take than what I've been hearing other places. It seems well thought out and makes sense to me. I appreciate the research you did here. That stat on how much Google has been spending on AI for the last decade is shocking 😯. Nice video!
Your right the titans are throwing a lot of money at it, for diminishing results. However for companies that collect data, using ai is very profitable because you now are able to figure out what the person is thinking about much clearer. Imagine if someone using chat gpt on writing a report and the data is then processed by Microsoft for providing ads to that person when they use edge. Or if it's research related companies would like to hire people who do that type of research like pharmaceuticals so they can send job ads to those who use ai assistant for specific jobs.
Using ai for analytics and launching ai products are different though :)
The way AI is structured, i.e. make bots, train bots, promote/demote bots after a test, rinse & repeat - is very limiting.
People recognise that the army of bots which are assigned to solving a task - operate following a black-box model, and that is true. The black box hides the topology of the network where a sequence of logic decisions bring to the final result; this structure is very limiting, because you can correct any error exclusively by trial and error.
This has never happened in the history of human engineering; sooner or later, engineers first devised an empirical method to calculate a machine or device, and successively they always found an analytical methodology for locating the proper solutions.
Arrays and matrices of bots don't scale up very well; the telephone engineers of 1920 faced the same problem when the telephone network expanded first locally, and then internationally. The future of AI will require that software engineers join forces with mathematicians, and together they intervene inside the black boxes.
Thank you Harry for this video on AI. In parallel to what you said in the video, I like to add that the AI development is akin to the Race of the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland...
NVIDIA is also participating in the AI race in addition to providing GPUs. They publish great papers every period. NVIDIA AI research is mostly related to images, videos, and games. They don't care about text generation. That's why they do not try to compete with ChatGPT.
Thread was a fad!
Yep, unfortunately so for meta
“During a gold rush, sell shovels.”
Elon musk bought Twitter so he proved money can buy succes 😂
How do you manage to get 1+1 to equal 7? American moment 😂
Twitter/X is not a profitable company. How do you define that as succes? Stupid!
Any rich kid can buy things but few can grow them to be better…. Many were abused so they were taught how to abuse by their parents….. Just reality. I judge people by the health of how they impact themselves and others so Elon is a failure in my book. Money does nothing if you don’t have the maturity to do healthy things with it. Then those people just end up harming themselves and others. Life is always healthier when things are more equitable so people are treated as equal and meritocracy can happen. But this is crony capitalism where criminals push any healthy people out that they can.
I am a mixed race person that grew up a millionaire and became homeless and disabled after college before moving back to my parents house to heal from things like Gabby Pettito died from, I literally have her same injuries and I want others to learn from me because I somehow survived to heal more each day.
This reminds me of Sony in the Streaming Wars. They didn't fight and turned out the ultimate winner. Google/Facebook own lots of otherwise good training data they can sell to other start ups and take a portion of the stock as payment. Doesn't matter who wins, someone will, and They will have a stake.
Woah, is this the first video with a face reveal? Keep up the great work, man!
Thanks chad!
Very intresting content as usual ! There’s also a small problem with threads being that it isn’t available in the EU as of the time being due to some regulatory uncertainty. This is a bad strategy for a giant such as meta to delay the lunch of a product for an entire area.
Another great video wish you had enough resources to do news as well. One best new channels out there, great work.
Great video, a crucial perspective! “Giants gone crumble, new companies gonna pop up out of no where and it’s gonna be dramatic” 🏁
"Bard is gonna end up as the next Bing while ChatGPT ends up as the next Google"
that comparison is brilliant haha, great video
also on some parts of the video, I felt the music was just a little bit too loud, not enough to be distracting, but it could be a little lower
I think that Nvidia would care if Apple wins the AI war, as Apple is working on their own accelerators for their devices. But since it's Apple, they can't win unless they sell the M chips to other manufacturers or everyone buys Apple stuff (also not sure Apple can actually... Train large models)
Apple is far behind, they just copied meta for their own VR product hype. Nvidia has already won the AI war, in a couple years the results will speak for themselves.
Even apple would not make a dent. You completely forget the software moat around Nvidia and the fact that the M series of SOCs are horrible for AI. No one is using those.
If I recall properly, Google researchers are the ones that came up with 'Transformers', the very technology that ChatGPT uses. GPT literally stands for Generative Pretrained Transformer.
The way you phrase it seems more like a branding problem than actually “just throwing money at it” problem.
The problem with the examples you named (Bard, Threads, etc…) is related to Branding. Look at how Bard is known to the public… even you said it yourself, it’s a ChatGPT clone. Likewise, look at how Threads is branded. Even it’s early adopters know it as “Not Twitter”.
That’s the inherent problem. It’s not that Tech threw money at it. It’s that these products lack any kind of identity. Had FaceBook branded itself as “Not MySpace”, it would have suffered the same fate.
Don’t tell them that!! Great video brother!!
Thanks as always Daniel!
So nice to put a voice to face. Thank you for showing yourself on a camera for a few shots. I really enjoy your content.
I ain't joining threads cause i hate the narrative of "fact chacking 🤓" 1. It's nerdy. 2. It can be used for censorship and facebook is the one company that i wouldnt trust in any way with that.
Love all of your vids but in these where you have the camera i feel like the sound and the video arent synchronized well. I feel its slitghtly shifted but otherwise everything is great
Really appreciate the feedback man, will look into that
I'm blown away with some of these statistics such as Google investing over 200 billion in the Ai program. Your title speaks volumes about companies haste to use enormous cash to buy success. These facts are real and shouldn't be ignored 😎💯💪🏾👍🏾
It puts a smile on my face to see these big billionaires fail
OpenAi is owned by Microsoft
Your videos are really interesting and it makes me think, thanks for the work put in
Amazing perspective and storytelling, wonder who works on your team for research
I miss when everything didn’t have a subreddit
Hahaha
Keep up the great work, your videos are so good.
If you are implying that Tesla's FSD is a "big bet" on AI, I'd agree. But I think that one will actually work out. The architecture that they are using to solve the problem is fundamentally different from Waymo, Cruise, Zoox, or any of these other half-assed robotaxi companies. No geofencing, no 'control center' (ran by humans), no lidar, only 8+ cameras and neural nets. This architecture has practically no ceiling to how good it can get. Biggest constraint going forward will be compute power (i.e. Tesla is buying NVIDIA chips like crazy, and designing their own for Dojo). Robotaxis are coming this decade & it will be interesting to see how it shakes out.
Is the audio not synced with the video for anyone else? I've tried reloading the video a few times.
Love the new style of video, Hari :-)
Your joke about Options was perfect
I think the only people who can create the tech the big thing is people that are creative and passionate about their goals and great video man :]
I think threads failed mainly due to the amount of data the app was collecting and this actually was a trending topic after threads gain popularity after few days of its launch and users took jab on it as it was from meta after all but if it did not collect that amount of unnecessary private data of users I think it could have become next Twitter for sure as people would have looked at it as other social media app alternative of Twitter than being a meta app
As the infamous Ariana Grande once said.
Whoever said money can't solve your problems
Must not have had enough money to solve 'em
Loving your videos recently on AI awareness ❤
Thanks man!
You're a very good analyst + storyteller. Congrats man.
You should consider having shots of you interacting with graphics at in the same shot (pointing/gesturing at an infograph). It's a little too whiplash to change from fast pace graphics to just you
I asked him for a face reveal and not much time passed, he gave us it! Bravo sir, when times get tough, please keep your own head up and do what is best for you.. we WANT more content.
I've been thinking about this for a while now. I absolutely love your videos, but PLEASE fix the video/audio delay as it is not synchronized
Corporations competing to ‘win’ AI Is precisely the kind of desperate greed that could spell disaster for our species in the future
I think people will use whatever 'AI' service works best. Best being accurate, fast, cheap, easy to use and not bound by politics.
Meta and Apple both made a big bet on AR systems, and one day that will make a lot of money but that's not today or tomorrow. So now they may as well take a stab at 'AI' and maybe hit the right combination of the best factors to make a profitable service.
I really enjoy the new format of your videos.
Great thinking and thanks for showing your face! Maybe big tech can spin up startups and acquire them after a few years as part of a complicated scheme
8:55 “…to come up with Bard.” Lol epic bad take. I’ll come back in a year to add some chuckles.
This channel is great for pleb takes by someone who is obviously just reading headlines and never does any research on anything cutting edge.
Maybe keep up with HN? Or browse an AI subreddit if you want to talk about AI?
Summarizing old mainstream news is just bad take fuel.
Google acquired CZcams after it was successful, they didn't launch it.
Reminds me of the people who made a mint off of the California gold rush. The people that sold provisions (eggs cost $12 for a dozen), clothing (Levi's) etc. They made a mint off of prospectors.
Unbelievable greed on a massive scale casts a shadow over what is real and true: no one needs anymore crap from big tech companies.
This perspective is spot on
One big oversight in this video is that it's almost never the first to market that becomes the market leader. Other companies will be watching, seeing where openAI leaves gaps, and jump in.
they could outcompete each other with their api i guess. which one has better api currently?
Distribution is big tech‘s most significant competitive advantage and that’s still a major one.
They do have lots of data which is key to AI, so that’s their strength there. But I agree with your general point.
LOVED the buying calls vs selling puts conclusion 😘👌 beautiful wrap up
Hey dude, in case you didn't realise, your audio is out of sync with the video of you speaking slightly
Another point of view. Big tech companies know they cannot stand still, they can't remain complacent. Being dominant in the market today means nothing if they're not moving with the times, ala Blackberry. Maybe think of it this way, they could chase after the bus and maybe catch it, otherwise they are already at the bus stop and they'll be left behind anyways. You lose a 100% of the shots you don't take, and all that.
Unlike your other videos, that’s a pretty bad take. For example, Google didn’t just invested $200b+ to come up with Bard. They were the ones pushing the AI industry forward and the entire GPT thing came to being only thanks to researchers at Google poking around, coming up with it, and then open-sourcing.
Regarding the "Baggage" hypothesis, I would have also said something about efficiency and focus.
Is that you talking in blue background? I feel like the audio isn't sync very well and it makes this weird effect. It doesn't feel like the voice is coming from you. I thought it was a stock video for a moment.
Wasn't google the ones that came up with transformer architecture that gpts use?
My perceptive of this is, they already all have strong base. Too strong in fact that it's not about losing money, they want to try everything in hope of getting a second foundation (which are often also hindered by their strong brand base Fondation), I mean, what good is frozen money that are just in bank, perhaps only for the shareholder, that's why they want to burn it to whatever it's. Tbh I also kinda support this since it create more job and better economic cycle
Can someone explain what a FB poke was?
Loved the call / put analogy 👍
Ah, wasn't sure how many people would get the analogy. Glad to see you liked it!
Chat GPT is simply better than Google's Bard.
What I fail to understand is why they don't just spend all these billions on refining these existing products 🤷🏾♂️
Great video and I do support at least 90% of your content in the video. thumbs up
Make sense!
X isn't dying. It's preparing for a bigger field.
Great video, awesome content!!
More hand gestures would make your presentation epic ❤
Thanks for the feedback man
With regards to Microsoft and Google shifting towards services such as cloud - who would have thought that controlling the infrastructure is a good idea?
Nice 👍 explanation on a complex topic 😸
What confuses me is most of the big tech companies started on a shoe string budget with a good idea and execution. Why they thought money and brute force would work, no idea.
If the rumors are correct, it would appear rather then direct competition in AI, Meta aims to improve their own and utilize open source communities to help test and improve their own stuff, some of it is perhaps out to make openAI's framework of selling tokens to use the models, obsolete;
"According to an initial rumor, Llama 3 will be able to compete with GPT-4, but will still be freely available under the Llama license."
Yeah Llama 2 runs on an M1 Mac so I think Meta's game is something similar to Android.
I hope google AI efforts weren't just focused on a chat not, but will allow them to expand in new markets selling to corporate America (ex, machine learning applied to biotech, research and others).
I think Amazon might be the worst offender, trying to compete and dominate any market in existence at once.
Great video, my feedback remains the same! Do something Aby the voice, is to soft on the earphones.
Bard should come up with FREE text to drawing or sketch to precise architectural drawing functionality for instance, if it wants to turn this chatgpt upside down
I really think you're off base on this, Google's Gemini is set to be THE ai tool, at least in the short-term future.
OpenAI is also largely funded by microsoft so they are not exactly an underdog.
In fact all 3 of the top AI labs, are hugely funded/owned by big tech.
Also Bard is not the total outcome of Google's AI funding, they have been at the cutting edge of research and helping to push forward the field for years. Including many other AI products already integrated into their services.
Sorry if I seems like I'm being too picky I generally like these videos, it just seems you may have skipped or ignored some research for this.
I met Mark Zuckerberg. He stared at my feet way more than is socially acceptable. It was awkward. I'll never go to Old Navy during a hoodie sale again.
Threads is one of the best examples why it wad better for Elon to buy twitter than create a new one.
Finally, someone said it. It's not easy to migrate a loyal userbase from a competitor unless you are providing something truly mindblowing
estos videos son la leche 👍👍👍
@5:52 "vocal minority" well played sir
Very interesting. There’s one huge financing not mentioned though which is the tax money (taken from people who actually work for their living) which is given to these companies in power to secure the information. All adding to a false economic continuum.
I enjoy seeing your face in the new videos, makes me understand it's not an AI channel
Great video as always
Thank you Balpreet!
I never thought these big tech would be so startled to follow these petty trends of the now trending thing than we should too grab some market out of it.
First time i am seeing these manipulators are actually riding FOMO.
Good video 👍
I like a lot of the reasoning here. Unfortunately misunderstanding of the technical side seems to have made basically all the conclusions garbage :(
10:35 Let's start of with just the small bit on NVIDIA. The Idea that NVIDIA could be "making AI" instead of just selling the tools is ridiculous. AI is tools and techniques most of which were made at universities or made public to advanced technical capability, while NVIDIA is a hardware design company. They have no way to stop AI being done on other peoples platform nor the technical capacity built up to make use of it. There is a reason that a lot of AI development has happened at social media companies, which is that you need data to build the actual AI components, and you need to custom build for the actual magnetizable end use case, makes them the natural companies to lead the field. NVIDIA is a hardware focused company with no clear way to make actual end products. NVIDIA trying to lock in and in someway "own" AI, besides completely destroying the current nature of the company by trying to conglomertize, is to try to get the tools to make AI be locked into NVIDIA hardware. Which they have, to a degree of success, mostly by keeping the core parts of the tools they use for scientific compute and AI closed source, while still encouraging open source products to develop on it, making a locked in ecosystem, and by making hardware improvements, from architecture to entire new chip series, so in addition to being hard leaving NVIDIA will leave you will also at the end be worse off. They are seeing the payoff right now of higher risk higher reward commitment to AI right now, they have annoyed people with there lock-in attempts and burnt a lot of money on hardware innovation that would mostly only payoff if AI took of, especially compared to AMD. They did gamble on being the next big thing. They just won, for now.
That brings me to the big part. OpenAI has not won AI by any means. Bing was profitable (after a decade of losses) in fact more profitable per user than Google; Now it's a money bonfire. None of the most important problems for use of AI in this type of space have been solved, and it is not possible to reduce cost per query to sane levels without lobotomizing the model so hard it is complete shit. They are going to be ripped apart as Microsoft tries to justifies the money that has been shoveled in, and are now bolted to a poor use of AI tech that is going nowhere fast in the near term. What everyone wants is a search engine that gaslights you and is to expensive for any company to run without shaking you down. They are only looking like they are winning because they are the focal point of a massive bubble. Cloud compute and technical support and tools is probably a big part the future for AI. One which Google, Facebook, and Amazon are perfectly positioned for. AI is more a technology than a product, we are in a phase where actual profitable deployment is a massive problem for what is currently possible, this requires actually finding viable use cases, making the deployable models, and deploying them efficiently. The current technically feasible use cases are eclectic and hard to identify, the big firms should not be putting massive bets on any of them individually, ideally people in those fields and industries can self Identify and pilot viability on there own, while the big AI firms focus on expanding what is technically possible and making what is already possible more efficient. This points towards making platforms, trying to make building more capable AI models easier for people with less expertise, to increase self discovery of profitable uses, and selling deployment of these solutions so that you can invisibly work on optimizing underling usage while getting paid for all the actual successful uses. Amazon is the leader in Enterprise cloud solutions, has experience deploying AI solutions at scale (eg. Alexa, though that is also burning money) and some respectable research expertise and creditably built up. Facebook has lots of data and experience deploying these types of products at scale, and a world leading AI department for research. Google is already a large deployer of AI models in there search, social media, and advertising business, this is addition to experience in with consumer facing tools, enterprise solutions, a respectable enterprise cloud and a decent AI team with a good track record. Microsoft is the enterprise cloud #2 and a enterprise software leader that has now acquired a AI research leader. Which looks respectable, but they have far less experience deploying AI at scale, have bolted OpenAI on rather than endogenously growing it, which is notoriously dangerous and saddles a lot of pressure and distorted expectations to make what they where acquired to do work, even if it is a bad idea instead of just making the tech better, and finally Microsoft has a notoriously strange and hyper competitive culture. The OpenAI looks like pretty much the worse case scenario for an acquisition, with a high change of OpenAI being completely destroyed by Microsoft infighting when the current AI hype cycle ends.
I have to agree with you. Im surprised not many others pointed this out too in the comments. Great video at the start but really poor final conclusion in the last few minutes. It jumped from software to hardware in a really bad way. Yes, some of the FAANG these days blur the lines between software and hardware, but to imply that even the biggest software oriented company like Facebook could just overnight accomplish and reach what Intel, AMD and Nvidia have been doing for decades, is in my opinion, quite ridiculous and badly informed take.
amazing editing in this video
Glad to hear that man!