I have an insanely hard time believing that a CEO that copies his customers and competes directly with them with his own consumer product will be “doubling down” to help customers.
Sam has shown he has no good will towards anyone but himself.
Sam has shown he has no good will towards anyone but himself.
They have a monopoly. They can start copying any business that relies on them tomorrow.
And it’s not easy to build a better model. Do that’s not an option.
So you basically use them to deliver a tangential product woth the risk of them copying you, or refuse to play in AI.
You can’t innovate with OpenAI tech without risking that they’ll just copy you
It’s the amazon playbook: become the store and copy the best selling products.
I love gpt-4, just hate the direction of openAI. Sam knows he can take over the world with OpenAI, so he’s just doing it.
The reality is that anything that works is quickly snatched up by bigger players and you have no moat if you can’t work on your own model. And with Microsoft owning the near years worth of cards to do inference on it’s gonna be hard to even try to do that.
So you are left being the equivalent of an Uber driver for OpenAI slowly making negative value while pretending to get short term gains — and being scale capped by costs.
I agree on the risk of building on them, but then again any business has its risks.
My main point was that some of these first AI startups built on Open AI were always going to be eaten by them because the put themselves in the way of open AIs roadmap. I don’t believe the Amazon comparison yet, although they may eventually go down the copycat path. But many of these startups that were recently made obsolete were just trying to piggyback on the real innovation that is the GPTss.
I’m very happy with GPT 4 and the newest updates, it’s a great tool for me.
Disruption will always been painful for some and the frothyness around AI and fear of missing out is making people a little more cynical than is healthy, IMO.