Hacker News Reader

Comment by turnsout | Hacker News Reader

Isn’t their training subsidized by Microsoft? Sounds like Microsoft has the moat.

Microsoft is extremely likely to get rugged:

“Fifth, the board determines when we've attained AGI. Again, by AGI we mean a highly autonomous system that outperforms humans at most economically valuable work. Such a system is excluded from IP licenses and other commercial terms with Microsoft, which only apply to pre-AGI technology.”

https://openai.com/our-structure/

Sorry but that quote just makes it seem more likely that Microsoft will be able to hold on to their current agreement for a fairly long time.

“If we discover the holy grail in the unicorn meadow, you can’t have it” Is a fine clause for MS. Hardly a rug pull.

Sure, whatever.

The moat is still the cost.

I hear ya. But with great open source models like Llama 3.2 dropping near-daily, I wonder if/when we’ll reach a point where free models are good enough for 99% of tasks.

Llama is NOT open source. It’s freeware. We can’t reproduce it and its license has commercial restrictions.

That being said, most models are based on llama, so it may seem like a lot of movement is happening, but it’s not, really.

RWKV and deepseek are the only LLMs that’re fully open that I’m aware of.

If meta decided to stop releasing llama, that’s that.

If llama achieves valuable strides, it will definitely be put behind paywall. The play has always been the same, release something semi-polished until you gain mass adaptation, then build a paywall infront when people are reliant on it and attrition is expensive. Look at the twitter API for example, or reddit or what not.

When there's like 5 essentially interchangeable products from your competitors, you don't have a moat.

We don’t know that they will be interchangeable forever.

Just because they share a near identical interface does not mean they will always have identical capabilities

Reply on news.ycombinator.com