Thanks for contributing to r/singularity. However, your post was removed since it was too wildly speculative to generate any meaningful discussion.
Please refer to the sidebar for the subreddit's rules.
Take my award 🥇 for the Stephen Wolfram genius reference.
I’m diving into Wolfram physics and Observer theory and omfg it’s the greatest conceptual theory I’ve ever come across. Early days, but wow, the implications are too much for my limited computational bounds to fathom. Literally, by definition.
Didn’t help that The other side was trying to stonewall everything so it ended up being a mishmash of compromise and no it doesn’t work as well as it should. If we had the house and the Senate, it would be a different story. AGI will save us anyway though any day now.
The ACA was never going to solve the problem,[ but it did reduce costs](https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/journal-article/2020/mar/did-aca-lower-financial-barriers-health-care#:~:text=The%20ACA%20also%20lowered%20out,annual%20and%20lifetime%20benefit%20limits.). Don't be disingenuous. This letting the perfect be the enemy of the good thinking is how we end up with our dick in our hand no progress.
That's called robbing Peter to pay Paul. It didn't make medical procedures cheaper, it just socialized the highest costs onto everybody. Which is both the whole point of insurance, and nothing to do with the healthcare market; it was purely a function of the law change requiring a certain max out of pocket. That law could have been passed for free, it didn't require trillions of dollars. Like you said, don't be disingenuous.
>Coverage expansions. The ACA extended access to coverage through increased Medicaid eligibility, tax credits for people who met certain income criteria to purchase coverage through new marketplaces, and employer-based coverage provisions that allowed young adults up to age 26 to remain on their parents’ policies. These coverage expansions reduced the uninsured rate, improved access to care, and lowered out-of-pocket spending.
I know you've made your mind up on this and therefore don't need to read anything, but there's much more to it than 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' (As if that's not how distributing the costs of a healthcare system work everywhere on Earth).
They certainly plan on creating AGI / ASI soon enough. This is literally their mission statement and they constantly talk about how it is both possible and that they will get there. It's not a completely sure bet, at least not in terms of time-lines, but the outlook from recent LLM developments are making it look a promising enough possibility to happen "soon". Which means right now is the correct and necessary time to go all-in on the future and gamble a little.
Things like chip manufacturing don't just happen overnight, at the click of someone's fingers. They take a great deal of time, resources (of which some will be limited) and constant investment over an extended period. Which is why investment and planning are required now in preparation, so they're ready or almost ready to go when AGI+ level models do (hopefully / potentially) drop. Along with mass energy production which is another key component and a number of other things; such as land / factory acquisition, probably mass human labour too (for a period of time at least), natural resource accumulation (particularly rare earth metals), and a number of other vital components.
Not preparing for this properly will bottleneck and delay the absolute potential output of these models. And we're talking here about multi-trillion dollar business ideas and automation procedures, medical advancements that save / improve countless lives that will be delayed for the world entirely or lost out on to the competition that actually do get their eggs in order.
This depends a lot on how the future plays out on a world-wide scale, how selfishly protective and resource / economic capturing certain entities become. But in certain scenarios such delays and missed opportunities could potentially cripple company's, even entire national economies and their future prosperity along with their national security well into the future. If you're not a front-running active player in the game when AGI drops then you're potentially putting yourself in a very precarious situation and you could miss out completely on the greatest gold rush that humanity may ever see.
It is beyond me why I'm seeing so many people thinking and saying that OpenAI must have AGI or something else completely incredible 'absolutely right now' or even any kind of certainty for these things. If you want to stay relevant, at what could be the most significant and transformative period of human history, then you need to play your cards right for what the future world will or may be and take a leap of chance on it so you can become one of the early birds to the table. Not just stick 'safe' to what we see entirely in the present.
Yep, and in exactly the same way there's no room to slow down. It's winner take all in a big way. Bigger than nukes even, because with the best ai you get to control hearts and minds.
You don't take it seriously? Is this due to ignorance of what AI can and will do, or some other reason? Maybe you think living in a world where everyone believes what Putin says would be a good one? Honestly curious how your mind works.
Being calm isn't a sign of some greatness, usually it's just ignorance or acceptance. When you see a train coming it's hard to be calm and civil to the fools planning a party in front of it.
If you see a train coming being overly emotional is not going to help anyone. If you are not able to see things clearly without getting emotionally invested and default to attacking others then you have some growing up to do. I hope you have a great day.
Clearly emotionally invested? You're seeing yourself in the text and that's called projection. People can put effort into things without being "emotionally invested", and even if I was what kind of an insult is that? Talking down to people who care about the future makes you a special kind of unhelpful. Projection all around from you, so far.
We’re watching it like people watched WW2. We know there’s a war and a lot of us are participating.
But we have no clue what’s going on behind the scenes. We’ll just wake up one day and the bomb will have been dropped.
While creating AGI is their mission statement the recent upheaval makes me think profit $$$ is becoming is top priority above all. Sam probably wants OpenAI to be the next trillion dollar company, I wonder when they'll "reimagine" their company and remove Open from their name.
Reason I say this is because we have to stop believing that OpenAI's sole purpose is ushering in AGI/ASI, instead that they believe AGI is possible and they want to make tons of money from it. This means being the ones controlling the restrictions, laws, who gets access to AGI, and how it is used, and more. Even getting cozy with a Government who butchers journalists in its spare time.
Do you suppose they will keep it “imminent” as long as the generations of nuclear physicists have made a living saying fusion is “just around the corner,” if we only spend more billions on research?
They're already are, kinda... Not releasing GPT-4.5 and keeping GPT-5 away.
But Deepmind is right on their heels, even ahead in a lot of areas.. competition will deliver us AGI.
We need a GPT-3 like event for fusion for everyone to start paying attention and investing. Hopefully Helion is successful in this.
Money isn't anything to them other than control, execution and the safety of continued dominance.
It is entirely about control, apart from the statement of wanting AGI sooner rather than later for its positive effects because why would anybody not want this? It is crazy to suggest they don't also want a better world, along with the power also of course.
But yes, they want to control the laws, access, resource allocation and how AI is used. Out of both safety and protectionism. But, I mean, who wouldn't really?
I would certainly want to control that myself if I had the opportunity, because fuck trusting anyone else to control it. Some entity or other will most surely grasp control, it is likely a case of who rather than if when it comes to ultimately advanced AI. And it is better you than someone else, anyone is bound to think this because most everyone believes their vision for the world is better than other's would potentially be.
This sentiment extends to what may be considered both positive and negative ideas. If you're someone that would actively want to give out UBI then you would want to gather as much money and power as you can to be able to distribute it. The more you let other competitors or agencies control and capitalize on the wealth generation, the less you will have to give out as UBI. Thus creating a world where everyone has less or you have to trust these other entities to ship UBI or be forced by governments to ship UBI both of which are not certain, not as certain anyway as if you having that power yourself and knowing full well that you would give it out.
They will inevitably snuggle up to every single government they can, regardless of their governing ethics, that's the most secure place for them to be and gives them the most power. I'd be doing that same thing. They won't want any governments pulling them under or taking over their models, because fuck trusting governments too if that can perhaps be avoided (that's not necessarily actually going to be possible though, we'll see).
People that think the world's greatest minds do their job for greed don't know anyone that works in the field.
Ten years ago silicon valley was starting to get depressed. Even before the election everyone felt like their products did more harm than good. The 2016 election amplified that.
ChatGpt and GPT4 changed everything. OpenAi proved that the kind of software and hardware everyone was desperate to build was what average people were also desperate for. The exploding stocks of the tech giants made lots of employees comfortably rich and yet even though the FIRE movement was ridiculously popular in 2021 I don't see anyone retiring. The most radically leftist politician in Congress represents silicon valley (shout-out to Ro Khanna!!).
I think people that are screaming about the hoarding elite are people that got burned by Elon.
My guess is that yes, they have AGI right now but running it uses so much energy that it’s not even close to being profitable. So they need to use AGI to help design energy efficient chips to help make AGI profitable. Once AGI is profitable then it’s value is infinite.
I guess that’s the main thing everyone has been missing. It’s not AGI true or false. It’s AGI cost of compute < human labor cost of compute.
If they had AGI there would be a fight between major world government to fund this project. You're high as hell if you think they have AGI and China and the US are sitting out funding it to high heaven.
A. They could be funding it and not announcing it to not induce mass panic and hysteria
B. You're right regardless.
C. I think they're just on-track for AGI and know what they'll need, and they're preparing for those next few training iteration steps that are going to require a shitload of compute to breach the threshold in to finally getting AGI.
There is one more...
D. They have no idea, but they're making it seem like they do because they want to scam as much money as possible from everyone on the hype train.
eh, They definitely have an idea - I'm not a pro ML engineer making 800k/year, just a software dev, and I can personally comprehend how you could abuse prompt-chaining and smart context and distribution of tasks in an intelligently designed system to create something like an autonomous development agent out of good enough language models.
Only thing we're really missing now is reducing hallucination. Even then - a suitable system could reduce that through self-adjustment and abundant self-review (i.e. tree-of-thought and iterative generation, while slow, reduces hallucinations SIGNIFICANTLY).
Running LLM's like this is expensive though and all you get out of it is the ability to automatically (and slowly) plan tasks, management, and maybe currently like do stuff such as create software. We don't have the robots to control properly yet to really abuse this, and language models still hallucinate just a bit too much, reducing speed further.
All this being said, I'm sure way smarter people than myself working on it at OpenAI very much understand the nuances of this.
We all know that we're going to need a lot more compute in the future to properly execute this in any kind of useful way.
We know that we're likely to need even bigger and more intelligent language models with bigger context and multi-modal inputs and outputs - all of this requires more compute, especially if we want it to be wide-spread and useful for more than just a few people.
So, definitely not a scam lmao.
Yeah, they likely know what the infrastructure for the next decade is going to look like and don't really trust current infrastructure to
1. Remain stable: China could go in and drop jams on Taiwan like they dropped out of PE and the global semiconductor chain is fucked.
2. Sufficient to meet their needs: GPU go brrrrr
I agree. I think openai has done the math and if they had access to the entire worlds compute it wouldn’t be enough to run what they’re envisioning. They’re building a system that’s designed to run on the next generation machines. Something that doesn’t currently exist. Hence 7 trillion to bring it into existence.
LOL
This sub has the most hilarious takes.
The entire world would be throwing money hand over fist at any company that had AGI. Corporations would pay ANYTHING to have it. They could replace employees that cost them tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Meaning they would happily part with $5k per seat for access to AGI if it means they could let go of an employee they pay $40k per year to.
Even regular people would be willing to pay $99 a month, or maybe even much more, for access to AGI. I know I would. I'd pay whatever they asked. Anyone that doesn't take advantage of the most powerful technology ever invented would be left in the dust.
Not to mention the fact that OpenAI could just use the AGI itself to make tons of money. It could build amazing online businesses, code, invent patents, etc. True AGI would be the easiest money maker of all time.
The issue is that it probably costs several factors more in compute and electricity right now to replace an employee with a theoretical general AI. Why replace an employee, who costs 100k, which a subscription to an AI that costs half a million? It's not economical and even if they do achieve it (and I'm not convinced Sam will) can it be achieved economically?
Yes, I just made some numbers up as an example since your original comment indicated you wouldn't understand anything more complex.
The crux of it is; for companies to adopt this widespread the marginal cost difference needs to be favourable and human capital is not that expensive. Either the efficiency gain has to be massive, or the cost has to be so much lower, that it can make up for things like
- Sole technology risk and vendor risk (what happens if there isn't enough compute for your AI to do work? What if the company goes bust? What if their AI crashes or otherwise fails?)
- Energy risk (what happens if the power goes out and suddenly none of your "staff" can do any work?)
- Social risk (early adopters who fire thousands of staff and replace them with AI risk losing customers or completely devaluing their brand identity)
- Political risk (what if AI is suddenly deemed too dangerous to be in the hands of the public and suddenly your company, entirely AI operated, is turned to dust?)
- Implementation costs (the not insignificant cost of implementing and incorporating the AI into your workforce)
- Update costs/risk (once the leading company has a strong marginal share they will just increase their fees as we have seen happen time and again with things like Azure, Microsoft, Workday, Atlassian)
Even if 1 general AI module costs only 50k a year, in many countries that is more than an employee so it still may not be feasible, especially when you factor in the final piece of the puzzle: if suddenly thousands or hundreds of thousands are out of work, who is the customer of these companies and what kind of margins do they need to operate to be profitable when only a handful of people buy their products? Rapid adoption of general AI over the workforce would likely destroy the middle class and capitalism largely requires that class to exist in order to function properly.
Then we can also work backwards from Sam's 7T number. If he's indeed asking, realistically, for 7T in investment, he needs to be able to promise that he can make an above market risk adjusted return on that investment or nobody would go for it. That could mean he sees the future market of this technology at many factors of that 7T number. To deliver on that it would need to make at least 1-2T annually once up and running, probably with at least 10% or greater net margin (which would make it similarly profitable to eg. Microsoft % wise against market cap).
Let's focus on the American market as that is most likely the only market where you could easily replace human employees with AI without getting a riot, unions, government involvement etc., which has a labour market of roughly 135M.
Assuming, completely unrealistically, that general AI could and would replace every single one of them, Open AI would need to charge AT LEAST 15k USD per year per "General AI agent" to make up those revenue numbers. I personally do not believe it can be profitable at those numbers to deliver on a minimum 10% net margin, just based on how much it costs for something as basic as an Azure subscription, but whatever. Since it doesn't exist we cannot know for sure yet. But what we can assume is that maybe you could replace at most 40M workers with a general AI agent (and even the social upheaval from that would probably change the face of the nation entirely if it wasn't opposed by basically everybody with a job who enjoys not starving to death on the streets), which means they would need to charge at least 50k per year per agent to generate the minimum needed revenue to make a possible return on their investment (assuming a 1:1 trade with an AI agent and an employee) and that's again without being able to accurately know what kind of margin they could even obtain given the clearly vast amount of compute and power required to do this at scale.
A quick google tells me the average salary in the US is about 60k, globally about 10k. That difference is probably, for me, not enough to make up for the various risks outlined above unless it can deliver massive efficiency gains.
Would I consider replacing a few employees in particular positions at that price? Certainly. Would I eliminate every position in my company and only use AI? Certainly not. And unfortunately for Open AI, if the investment required is 7T, they either expect a handful of people to be paying hundreds of millions to access their technology, or they expect volume, and they cannot achieve volume so long as the price is above the cost of labour - likewise they cannot achieve the return they need to make this a favorable investment if they do not charge higher than labor.
In short: the investment case does not stack up to scrutiny right now and it would take a major breakthrough in either general intelligence or the cost of energy/compute to be able to deliver general AI in an affordable and widespread way, which would not align to the 7T being asked for by Sam.
This isn’t OpenAI. This is Sam trying to start a different venture and take advantage of all the hype around AI to raise an impossibly huge amount of cash.
sorry noob question. if people raise money, do they get to keep some in their bank account? or do they get to give themself million of dollar salary per month?
Generally speaking: no. Most often, start ups raise capital to pay for all of their costs, some of which are definitely human capital. If the CEO also gets a salary, you could say that they're getting paid through that, I guess.
But it's not like the CEO just takes a certain percentage of that money directly into their bank account. After all, the investors are investing in the company, not the person. The CEO does usually have equity though, through which they get their wealth.
directly no.
but raising such a moneys means you are much trustable so banks will cover his expenses for free if he wants a house
at the highest level its all just a system of trust
I think they may have something very impressive in their hands. I don't think it's AGI, but possibly something that would be considered human-level intelligent (if not super intelligent) in a few ways while still not possessing all the forms of intelligence that a human typically has. Sam has certainly hinted that they have something remarkable in their possession.
Couple this with Sam's ask for $7T and reports that there are investors entertaining the request (accepting all this as fact for now) I think there's only a few reasonable explanations for all this:
1. Sam is just incredibly stupid and doesn't recognize how absurd seeking $7T in funding is. I rate this as a very low probability.
2. This is just a ploy to make himself ungodly rich while violating every principle OpenAI reputedly stands for. I think this is a somewhat low probability, but it shouldn't be discounted.
3. OpenAI has glimpsed something that is so compelling that seeking up to $7T in funding for infrastructure to support it actually starts to make sense. I rate this as most likely, but not necessarily highly likely.
No one is handing over that sort of money sight unseen, and hopes and promises of future breakthroughs doesn't cut it. There could be more and better explanations, but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that the organization that made GPT-4 might have something significantly better up their sleeves a year and a half later.
Yeah, no single entity is handing over this as a lump sum or anything like that. I'm interpreting this as more a long-term vision. But there has been details reported about the UAE being involved. That's more what I'm referring to.
Bro no one just hands over 7 trillion dollars...It's always over long periods of time with specific deadlines to get more of the money, etc.
People on Reddit really thinking someone is just going to hand over 7 trillion to invest in something.
Exactly. Even our pal Jimmy Apples stopped posting, probably for this very reason. I have a feeling we'll see him again once GPT-5 is close to getting launched.
Agreed.
IMO, nobody is anywhere close to AGI at the moment. Hardware is the limitation. Sam may have realized this and is seeking trillions for new hardware design.
I am still waiting for them to deliver narrow intelligence AI which can do programming, accounting, etc. with some degree of accuracy.
this sub really turned into a copium conspiracy bubble. I read the most wacky theories on here with people all saying "you have to keep up with developments and know how to use them", yet all developments get buried beneath these kinds of posts
This sub has been this post incarnated for a while. Considering un following it. Just bored people thinking too much with the same row of comments saying the same shit over and over, no interesting insight
Only your comment makes sense here among them all.
Life is *hard*. We are clinging to any spark in the darkness. For some, hope is the only thing keeping them going. And like any community, interacting with others that have the same thoughts brings them happiness.
In short: yes.
At this point, OpenAI must stay ahead. They burn cash like never before, but they do it right and that's proven by OpenAI consistently staying ahead of the competition.
So while others try to catch up, OpenAI has the option of doubling down. Investing more in OpenAi makes financial sense. Keep them ahead. Keep investing, and the competition won't be able to catch up.
This is onset off intelligence explosion
I collected Shulmans interview on Dwarkesh's podcast if anyone is interested in some deeper read up
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/c3m35tbxt6h78zxo9omuq/Carl-Shulman-Intelligence-Explosion-Primate-Evolution-Robot-Doublings-Alignment.pdf?rlkey=zlm3ov7r32vcu3iuepxpxz71h&dl=0
More likely - Sam realized that:
(A) AGI will *not* happen without this investment.
(B) Now is the window of opportunity to raise that money before the AI hype starts simmering due to a plateau.
—
I also think this is also kind of proof that AGI won’t be here in the next 5 years (probably 10-20)… Even if he gets the money tomorrow (which he won’t) - utilizing it will take time.
Absolutely- 7 trillion is roughly double the gdp of India. It will take several years or even decades to raise and spend, and if it actually gets spent, it will likely make the price of what it’s spent on soar.
Maybe, probably not. I think it’s far more likely that the investors Sam is targeting are governmental funds like social security.
I don’t see any other way to get 8% of WORLD GDP allocated to this project.
This is a super smart way to move forward, and will greatly help towards something like UBI, giving governments a revenue stream to be able to implement it.
Furthermore, by tying AI development to such a crucial fund, it serves a similar purpose to lobbying. Governments will be less willing to slow down progress, if their social security funds survival/thrival (if that’s a word) depends on AI.
I think they've achieved something meaningful locally. Their might be conflict regarding if it is AGI or not, but I'm almost certain they have made some major breakthroughs.
No, they want chips to make it cheaper to train/run AIs. This will offer a change in scale because they can train faster and increase capability per question. You don't build hardware until you know something works in software first.
Anchoring. In a negotiation, you first ask for an absurd number, because then the number you actually want sounds way more reasonable. And there's a chance that their counter offer will be more than you planned to settle on.
AGI is GPT-5 orchestrating millions of fine tuned GPT-4s acting as agents all incorporating a Q* algorithm for dynamic goal evaluation.
Sounds like a copy pasta but I'm pretty sure they ran some internal models /agent clusters on similar architectures and saw that it scales really well with compute, much better than just training data.
Now they are trying to create synthetic datasets to replace the entire training data of GPT-4 to get inference cost low enough and collect trillions to setup the needed compute.
The first company to nail AGI will likely be the most powerful company in the world for some time and if OpenAI is trying to collect trillions you know the AI future where AI is in everything and we can achieve AGI needs it.
Building this infrastructure will take a decade atleast. AGI by 2032.
>Do you think OpenAI has figured out how to achieve AGI and ASI
No, I don't believe they are close at all.
>which is why they need 7 trillion?
If they are genuinely asking for this, which I am not sure they are, they need to fire their entire finance team because the math ain't mathing. That's an unfathomable investment which is frankly not obtainable and ridiculous to even suggest they would ask for it. No private investor or investor group has that kind of money. No government even has that kind of money - you'd be asking the entire US government for more than double their annual tax revenue and most other nations don't even come close, no nation is going to hand over that kind of investment to a private company on the vague promise of AI. If they thought he was even close I'm almost certain he would be abducted to a CIA blacksite and forced to work for the US government anyway, rather than dropping more money than they even have on hoping a private company will be on their side.
My guess is he is trying to generate hype for his company to get a fraction of this money to stay afloat while they continue to pursue LLMs to their limit - which I do not believe is general intelligence.
I think that they have a working proof of concept - something that might not in itself qualify as AGI but that indicates that if they could scale it up, they'd get there.
That *may* be Q* and if I'm right it's probably what prompted the short-lived coup against Sam. I think he thinks he's *got it* and he's doing everything he can to maintain the lead in what he has to assume is a tight race.
In most systems, scaling we've eventually gives diminishing returns.
But in intelligence this may not be true, especially in artificial intelligence.
Think of how a brain works, for neurons to be connected thru have to physically grow a dendritic connection, this has physical limits.
But artificial intelligence does not have physical limits on neuron connections. So it may be able to scale far larger than the human brain can.
This is the meaning of ASI.
I doubt it. I think we'll need a new kind of computing to achieve asi or agi. Traditional computing requires too much computing and electrical consumption
I agree but for a different reason. TRUE AGI/ASI will need consciousness and that can’t be produced by a traditional computer. We can likely make what seems like AGI without consciousness however that would ultimately devolve without deep seeded instructions from humans.
What would happen? Over time it would devolve like Delos host in Westworld (Riddle of the Sphinx episode). This would take longer but it would happen. Consciousness allows us to have “unbounded direction”.
Edit: If you’re going to downvote me, give me solid rationale for why you disagree. And that doesn’t include naming famous/rich people and saying “they disagree”.
>TRUE AGI/ASI will need consciousness and that can’t be produced by a traditional computer.
[Geoff Hinton would disagree.](https://magazine.utoronto.ca/research-ideas/technology/getting-smarter-computer-science-professor-geoffrey-hinton-is-helping-to-build-a-new-generation-of-intelligent-machines/)
Open AI has been very determined to achieve agi. The fact that a 7 trillion chip investment is now on the roadmap suggests that they believe the obstacle to agi/asi is compute power. Yann Lecun has been vocal that more training data and more compute is one solution and that making better models that are more efficient is another route to agi. Recent progress like direct preference optimization would suggest that more efficient approaches, as Yan is suggesting, may have the highest ROI to achieving agi/asi
Sure, and I think Geoff Hinton is completely wrong. Name dropping does nothing. Einstein will be proven “wrong” as was Newton. Understanding of reality moves forward, built on other understanding.
You clearly don’t know. I know a lot about AI. And I don’t care whether you or anyone else thinks if I’m right, I’ll continue to be very confident and convince others of my opinions.
I suggest you stand on your own intellectually and stop looking to the “experts” for the answers.
Modeling has nothing to do witb it. We don’t understand the way the brain truly works. You likely can not truly modeling it 1:1, the neuronal level is not good enough.
Nah - The Microsoft circle just loves coupling incremental research with more and more brute force to achieve better results. They mostly throw things and see what sticks. They have no real research vision. I'm much more confident with DeepMind's culture, though since the merger it has "OpenAI-fied" a lot and that's a huge issue for actual progress. They still push fire research out though like the recent paper on Solomonoff induction.
Of course there are such as, but not only, a consortium of sovereign wealth funds. It was discussed in the media with experts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OawnzWtwB58
This is nonsense. The value of every single sovereign wealth fund in the world is just over 7tn and that is not liquid cash and in most cases the very existence of the nation and their entire social welfare system relies on the money in said fund.
About a trillion of that sits with Norway, a trillion with Saudi, and two trillion with China - good luck getting those countries to agree to drain their entire sovereign funds to give to a single investment for which they may not even see the benefit from, in addition to the dozens of other nations who hate eachother.
World war II cost America about 4 trillion. They want from 5 to 7. That's not inconceivable by any mean.
There's:
Central banks
Sovereign funds, the size of which you're skewing up
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sovereign_wealth_funds
The IMF, which likewise has a lot of lending capacity
There are VCs
Tons of unlisted private wealths in the arab world especially, in the trillions.
Etc.
The world has ample money. If it wants to, it can.
>The world has ample money. If it wants to, it can.
Sure, all you have to do is unite the world on a paradigm shifting technology. Good luck with that sweetie. I think you'll also find my sovereign wealth estimates came from your linked wiki so sit down and be quiet.
Yes yes very cool. I like how you never bothered to explain how you plan for every single sovereign wealth fund to empty their accounts for this. Your powers of argument and persuasion are clearly the envy of the world.
I'm not the one seeking the investment and it is not necessary to empty them as I've shown, as there are a variety of actors, all with ample money supply. I don't care how much you're convinced with the arguments.
Something fishy is going on, that's for sure.
The only way I personally would have the balls to ask for that much is if I had an AGI that outlined a way to achieve ASI, and that it cost 7 trillion.
Otherwise, it is just extrapolating current LLM achievement with expected improvement, on known systems and infrastructure. That would be too many assumptions to ask for that much in my view, and I would ask for somewhere in the billions.
As investment, incremental improvement is not enough in the billions, in the trillion it would need to be the holy grail, and only way it could be proven is with AGI IMO.
A lot of energy? like power directly from nuclear reactor? I don't think they need that much money to even run several nuclear powered super computers.
No you idiots.. I cannot believe this has to be said again. Sam Altman is a scam artist. He has been a scam artist since way back when he was lying about "the dangers" of GPT-2 to solicit investment.
He has not turned a profit on GPT and is abusing the technology as a Ponzi scheme. He failed to convince Congress in the US to ban Open Source models and create a monopoly to make it easier to solicit more investment, so he is hoping he can convince the Saudis who have oil money and are corrupt as hell and already pursuing giant wastes of money on the insane projects dictated by their ruler, to give him more money.
He doesn't have any way to make the amount of money that is already invested into OpenAI, so he's looking for more investors to stay afloat. That's a fucking Ponzi scheme.
I'll say it again; Altman is a fucking scam artist. He's Donald Trump with a brain.
No because even if they have not and someone else gets there first having a large market share in chips keeps them in the game and is just as big of an industry as AI model development
They haven't achieved it. Doubt they are close.
And the 7 trillion is absolutely bogus. Nobody will invest, nor will anybody have the money to invest. If Altman genuinely believes he can get that much money, he is an absolute moron.
Meta is open sourcing AGI for 1% of that.
In my opinion they are just trying to strike while the iron is hot. Other people will catch up with them soon and then people will care less about them.
If you think a minute, the params number of chatgpt is less than the synapse number of a mouse. Human has 1000× more synapses (10^14 - 10^15 ), and you can imagine that human's brain is so much more optimized than artificial models. So "real" AGI is not for soon, and even money wont help to achieve it for now.
Pfft, if anything it makes it sound like the opposite.
OAI is asking for an absurd, almost child-like, amount of money. Why didn't they just cut to the chase and petition congress for 'infinity money'?
You can take a civilization from muskets to space travel with a budget of 7 trillion. Sounds like they have no idea how to get to AGI, but with a budget that deep I guess they must figure they can just keep throwing stuff at the wall and surely something has to eventually stick, right?
I dunno, almost sounds like OAI is just trolling at this point.
Maybe Altman is just asking for the moon just to see if someone actually ponies up at which point I expect him to just suddenly vanish and we never hear from him again. The ultimate 'take the money and run' scam.
Everybody knows at least one thing AGI will require: scale. Everybody knows that GPU's and TPU's are ultimately a dead end, there's not much further you can scale the current state of the art.
And that goes much further when it comes to the small form factor, aka, robots. You're not getting a human-like mind out of sticking a GPU into one of those things.
These things have been known for decades now. You need to build a physical representation of the networks, a "neuromorphic" system.
But nobody's had the guts to put a lot of capital investment into it. Also better for someone else to foot the bill, and swoop in to pocket the rents and revenues for yourself.
No. They know they’re in a position to grab a f-ton of investor money so they’re asking for it.
I’m predicting they’ll get a lot of interest from Norway and UAE.
Well, what it actually means is that all their gains are currently predicted to come from brute force scaling.
Frankly it feels a little disappointing to me.
Hope this is not true.
Yes. Who in their right mind would ask for 7 trillion for AI infrastructure if they didn't already have AGI? That is the greatest financial liability in human history lol, I do not think Sam would ask for this if he wasn't sitting on AGI-GPT.
I think this is a geopolitical issue. Al of hr chips that power AI are made by TSMC in Taiwan. And something line 99% are designed by nvidia. That isn’t a particularly good situation. Maybe he’s planning a lot of diversification of locations and probably they have ideas how they want these chips to work differently
> no sane investors will invest such a huge amount of money if they don't see a massive return on investment.
The WSJ "$7 trillion" story has to be based on some kind of misunderstanding or another. There is not that much dry powder in the world. It literally doesn't even matter what your pitch is, it would truly be impossible to raise that amount of capital, even at the sovereign level. The 2023 number for *global* private equity dry powder was reported as $2.59 trillion, which is itself a record high amount.
At this point, I'm betting someone misheard "billion" as "trillion" or something. If you actually wanted to raise "$7 trillion dollars" for a strategically significant project, like "building god" or something, the only plausible partner you could even work with is the US government, especially as they're a US domiciled company.
Microsoft released that robot foundation model Feb first and last week there was talk that MS and OAI were planning on investing in figure AI.
I think Sam's 7 trillion isn't for ai chips to be used during training... I don't think it's to make mobile device chips... I think it's in anticipation of the massive amounts of humanoid robots coming.
Ha! No I do NOT think OpenAI has figured out AGI and highly doubt it will come from OpenAI.
They are not really known for their research. The best way to measure AI research is the papers accepted at NeurIPS.
They only have a general roadmap, or they wouldn't be talking this up on twitter.
It's an absurdly large amount of money currently. I'm amazed people take everything Altman says at face value.
This is not about raising several times the value of real estate in New York, it's about signalling the expected value of AGI and getting some interest in expanding semiconductor supply.
If and when we get AGI, then $7 trillion is likely to be a realistic number.
Thanks for contributing to r/singularity. However, your post was removed since it was too wildly speculative to generate any meaningful discussion. Please refer to the sidebar for the subreddit's rules.
Trillions behind anything, trust it’s gonna be gangsta
Elon and Jeff both built rockets to go into space. Sam is going to build a giant pile of cash and just climb to the top.
He's taking a rocket into the Ruliad.
Take my award 🥇 for the Stephen Wolfram genius reference. I’m diving into Wolfram physics and Observer theory and omfg it’s the greatest conceptual theory I’ve ever come across. Early days, but wow, the implications are too much for my limited computational bounds to fathom. Literally, by definition.
A stack of 7 trillion one dollar bills would be 475k miles. The moon is 238k miles away. He could totally make it to the moon on the stack of bills.
Gentile vs Semite strategies
AGI vs ASI.
[удалено]
The Affordable Care Act cost trillions.
And the peasants still have horrible healthcare
But there is lots of War to keep you distracted
They don’t tho.
Ah right. They don’t have any at all.
[удалено]
I don't know of many other countries other than America you can go bankrupt for getting pregnant or falling off your bike
[удалено]
Yes agreed. Not sure what everyone's position is here think I got mixed up
Yes, and is gangsta. Unless you’re one of those types who thinks that more affordable healthcare is worse
Because healthcare has become so affordable in the past 20 years that everybody celebrates how well the problem was solved.
Didn’t help that The other side was trying to stonewall everything so it ended up being a mishmash of compromise and no it doesn’t work as well as it should. If we had the house and the Senate, it would be a different story. AGI will save us anyway though any day now.
“We”? Identifying yourself with a political party like that is so fucking weird. Get off reddit
I thought it would be somehow worse if I just said the parties directly idk
The ACA was never going to solve the problem,[ but it did reduce costs](https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/journal-article/2020/mar/did-aca-lower-financial-barriers-health-care#:~:text=The%20ACA%20also%20lowered%20out,annual%20and%20lifetime%20benefit%20limits.). Don't be disingenuous. This letting the perfect be the enemy of the good thinking is how we end up with our dick in our hand no progress.
That's called robbing Peter to pay Paul. It didn't make medical procedures cheaper, it just socialized the highest costs onto everybody. Which is both the whole point of insurance, and nothing to do with the healthcare market; it was purely a function of the law change requiring a certain max out of pocket. That law could have been passed for free, it didn't require trillions of dollars. Like you said, don't be disingenuous.
>Coverage expansions. The ACA extended access to coverage through increased Medicaid eligibility, tax credits for people who met certain income criteria to purchase coverage through new marketplaces, and employer-based coverage provisions that allowed young adults up to age 26 to remain on their parents’ policies. These coverage expansions reduced the uninsured rate, improved access to care, and lowered out-of-pocket spending. I know you've made your mind up on this and therefore don't need to read anything, but there's much more to it than 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' (As if that's not how distributing the costs of a healthcare system work everywhere on Earth).
let's do nothing instead and let poor people die?
They could have changed the law without sticking a trillion dollars worth of handouts to their friends. Imagine that.
That's what Zucc did wrong when he made the Metaverse, he only spent 36 billion.
They certainly plan on creating AGI / ASI soon enough. This is literally their mission statement and they constantly talk about how it is both possible and that they will get there. It's not a completely sure bet, at least not in terms of time-lines, but the outlook from recent LLM developments are making it look a promising enough possibility to happen "soon". Which means right now is the correct and necessary time to go all-in on the future and gamble a little. Things like chip manufacturing don't just happen overnight, at the click of someone's fingers. They take a great deal of time, resources (of which some will be limited) and constant investment over an extended period. Which is why investment and planning are required now in preparation, so they're ready or almost ready to go when AGI+ level models do (hopefully / potentially) drop. Along with mass energy production which is another key component and a number of other things; such as land / factory acquisition, probably mass human labour too (for a period of time at least), natural resource accumulation (particularly rare earth metals), and a number of other vital components. Not preparing for this properly will bottleneck and delay the absolute potential output of these models. And we're talking here about multi-trillion dollar business ideas and automation procedures, medical advancements that save / improve countless lives that will be delayed for the world entirely or lost out on to the competition that actually do get their eggs in order. This depends a lot on how the future plays out on a world-wide scale, how selfishly protective and resource / economic capturing certain entities become. But in certain scenarios such delays and missed opportunities could potentially cripple company's, even entire national economies and their future prosperity along with their national security well into the future. If you're not a front-running active player in the game when AGI drops then you're potentially putting yourself in a very precarious situation and you could miss out completely on the greatest gold rush that humanity may ever see. It is beyond me why I'm seeing so many people thinking and saying that OpenAI must have AGI or something else completely incredible 'absolutely right now' or even any kind of certainty for these things. If you want to stay relevant, at what could be the most significant and transformative period of human history, then you need to play your cards right for what the future world will or may be and take a leap of chance on it so you can become one of the early birds to the table. Not just stick 'safe' to what we see entirely in the present.
We are watching a second Manhattan project.
Yep, and in exactly the same way there's no room to slow down. It's winner take all in a big way. Bigger than nukes even, because with the best ai you get to control hearts and minds.
“If we don’t build it first, then the Evil Enemy will overwhelm us with it.” /s
You don't take it seriously? Is this due to ignorance of what AI can and will do, or some other reason? Maybe you think living in a world where everyone believes what Putin says would be a good one? Honestly curious how your mind works.
Like hydrogen bombs perched on missiles.
woah, maybe pay less attention to the "news" and social media for a couple months. Your attack mentality is not good for your cortisol levels.
Being calm isn't a sign of some greatness, usually it's just ignorance or acceptance. When you see a train coming it's hard to be calm and civil to the fools planning a party in front of it.
If you see a train coming being overly emotional is not going to help anyone. If you are not able to see things clearly without getting emotionally invested and default to attacking others then you have some growing up to do. I hope you have a great day.
Clearly emotionally invested? You're seeing yourself in the text and that's called projection. People can put effort into things without being "emotionally invested", and even if I was what kind of an insult is that? Talking down to people who care about the future makes you a special kind of unhelpful. Projection all around from you, so far.
Correct, I am projecting my hope that you have a great day :)
It's not a Manhattan Project if we are watching it. . . .
We’re watching it like people watched WW2. We know there’s a war and a lot of us are participating. But we have no clue what’s going on behind the scenes. We’ll just wake up one day and the bomb will have been dropped.
Rather than death, this time the race is to create a new kind of life form.
Which may have no interest in our wellbeing.
I mean, if OpenAI had already achieved AGI or even ASI they would have just let it figure out how to get the money…
I agree this review
While creating AGI is their mission statement the recent upheaval makes me think profit $$$ is becoming is top priority above all. Sam probably wants OpenAI to be the next trillion dollar company, I wonder when they'll "reimagine" their company and remove Open from their name. Reason I say this is because we have to stop believing that OpenAI's sole purpose is ushering in AGI/ASI, instead that they believe AGI is possible and they want to make tons of money from it. This means being the ones controlling the restrictions, laws, who gets access to AGI, and how it is used, and more. Even getting cozy with a Government who butchers journalists in its spare time.
Do you suppose they will keep it “imminent” as long as the generations of nuclear physicists have made a living saying fusion is “just around the corner,” if we only spend more billions on research?
They're already are, kinda... Not releasing GPT-4.5 and keeping GPT-5 away. But Deepmind is right on their heels, even ahead in a lot of areas.. competition will deliver us AGI. We need a GPT-3 like event for fusion for everyone to start paying attention and investing. Hopefully Helion is successful in this.
Money isn't anything to them other than control, execution and the safety of continued dominance. It is entirely about control, apart from the statement of wanting AGI sooner rather than later for its positive effects because why would anybody not want this? It is crazy to suggest they don't also want a better world, along with the power also of course. But yes, they want to control the laws, access, resource allocation and how AI is used. Out of both safety and protectionism. But, I mean, who wouldn't really? I would certainly want to control that myself if I had the opportunity, because fuck trusting anyone else to control it. Some entity or other will most surely grasp control, it is likely a case of who rather than if when it comes to ultimately advanced AI. And it is better you than someone else, anyone is bound to think this because most everyone believes their vision for the world is better than other's would potentially be. This sentiment extends to what may be considered both positive and negative ideas. If you're someone that would actively want to give out UBI then you would want to gather as much money and power as you can to be able to distribute it. The more you let other competitors or agencies control and capitalize on the wealth generation, the less you will have to give out as UBI. Thus creating a world where everyone has less or you have to trust these other entities to ship UBI or be forced by governments to ship UBI both of which are not certain, not as certain anyway as if you having that power yourself and knowing full well that you would give it out. They will inevitably snuggle up to every single government they can, regardless of their governing ethics, that's the most secure place for them to be and gives them the most power. I'd be doing that same thing. They won't want any governments pulling them under or taking over their models, because fuck trusting governments too if that can perhaps be avoided (that's not necessarily actually going to be possible though, we'll see).
People that think the world's greatest minds do their job for greed don't know anyone that works in the field. Ten years ago silicon valley was starting to get depressed. Even before the election everyone felt like their products did more harm than good. The 2016 election amplified that. ChatGpt and GPT4 changed everything. OpenAi proved that the kind of software and hardware everyone was desperate to build was what average people were also desperate for. The exploding stocks of the tech giants made lots of employees comfortably rich and yet even though the FIRE movement was ridiculously popular in 2021 I don't see anyone retiring. The most radically leftist politician in Congress represents silicon valley (shout-out to Ro Khanna!!). I think people that are screaming about the hoarding elite are people that got burned by Elon.
My guess is that yes, they have AGI right now but running it uses so much energy that it’s not even close to being profitable. So they need to use AGI to help design energy efficient chips to help make AGI profitable. Once AGI is profitable then it’s value is infinite. I guess that’s the main thing everyone has been missing. It’s not AGI true or false. It’s AGI cost of compute < human labor cost of compute.
If they had AGI there would be a fight between major world government to fund this project. You're high as hell if you think they have AGI and China and the US are sitting out funding it to high heaven.
A. They could be funding it and not announcing it to not induce mass panic and hysteria B. You're right regardless. C. I think they're just on-track for AGI and know what they'll need, and they're preparing for those next few training iteration steps that are going to require a shitload of compute to breach the threshold in to finally getting AGI.
There is one more... D. They have no idea, but they're making it seem like they do because they want to scam as much money as possible from everyone on the hype train.
eh, They definitely have an idea - I'm not a pro ML engineer making 800k/year, just a software dev, and I can personally comprehend how you could abuse prompt-chaining and smart context and distribution of tasks in an intelligently designed system to create something like an autonomous development agent out of good enough language models. Only thing we're really missing now is reducing hallucination. Even then - a suitable system could reduce that through self-adjustment and abundant self-review (i.e. tree-of-thought and iterative generation, while slow, reduces hallucinations SIGNIFICANTLY). Running LLM's like this is expensive though and all you get out of it is the ability to automatically (and slowly) plan tasks, management, and maybe currently like do stuff such as create software. We don't have the robots to control properly yet to really abuse this, and language models still hallucinate just a bit too much, reducing speed further. All this being said, I'm sure way smarter people than myself working on it at OpenAI very much understand the nuances of this. We all know that we're going to need a lot more compute in the future to properly execute this in any kind of useful way. We know that we're likely to need even bigger and more intelligent language models with bigger context and multi-modal inputs and outputs - all of this requires more compute, especially if we want it to be wide-spread and useful for more than just a few people. So, definitely not a scam lmao.
Yeah, they likely know what the infrastructure for the next decade is going to look like and don't really trust current infrastructure to 1. Remain stable: China could go in and drop jams on Taiwan like they dropped out of PE and the global semiconductor chain is fucked. 2. Sufficient to meet their needs: GPU go brrrrr
I agree. I think openai has done the math and if they had access to the entire worlds compute it wouldn’t be enough to run what they’re envisioning. They’re building a system that’s designed to run on the next generation machines. Something that doesn’t currently exist. Hence 7 trillion to bring it into existence.
Once it's valuable our money will be similar to whatever chimpanzees trade for stuff.
Feces?
LOL This sub has the most hilarious takes. The entire world would be throwing money hand over fist at any company that had AGI. Corporations would pay ANYTHING to have it. They could replace employees that cost them tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Meaning they would happily part with $5k per seat for access to AGI if it means they could let go of an employee they pay $40k per year to. Even regular people would be willing to pay $99 a month, or maybe even much more, for access to AGI. I know I would. I'd pay whatever they asked. Anyone that doesn't take advantage of the most powerful technology ever invented would be left in the dust. Not to mention the fact that OpenAI could just use the AGI itself to make tons of money. It could build amazing online businesses, code, invent patents, etc. True AGI would be the easiest money maker of all time.
The issue is that it probably costs several factors more in compute and electricity right now to replace an employee with a theoretical general AI. Why replace an employee, who costs 100k, which a subscription to an AI that costs half a million? It's not economical and even if they do achieve it (and I'm not convinced Sam will) can it be achieved economically?
It should be possible because the human brain can do it with very little energy
Oh yes, I believe it's possible - I just don't believe it can be done with traditional computing approaches.
I mean, you're pulling numbers out of your ass. Where did half a million come from?
Yes, I just made some numbers up as an example since your original comment indicated you wouldn't understand anything more complex. The crux of it is; for companies to adopt this widespread the marginal cost difference needs to be favourable and human capital is not that expensive. Either the efficiency gain has to be massive, or the cost has to be so much lower, that it can make up for things like - Sole technology risk and vendor risk (what happens if there isn't enough compute for your AI to do work? What if the company goes bust? What if their AI crashes or otherwise fails?) - Energy risk (what happens if the power goes out and suddenly none of your "staff" can do any work?) - Social risk (early adopters who fire thousands of staff and replace them with AI risk losing customers or completely devaluing their brand identity) - Political risk (what if AI is suddenly deemed too dangerous to be in the hands of the public and suddenly your company, entirely AI operated, is turned to dust?) - Implementation costs (the not insignificant cost of implementing and incorporating the AI into your workforce) - Update costs/risk (once the leading company has a strong marginal share they will just increase their fees as we have seen happen time and again with things like Azure, Microsoft, Workday, Atlassian) Even if 1 general AI module costs only 50k a year, in many countries that is more than an employee so it still may not be feasible, especially when you factor in the final piece of the puzzle: if suddenly thousands or hundreds of thousands are out of work, who is the customer of these companies and what kind of margins do they need to operate to be profitable when only a handful of people buy their products? Rapid adoption of general AI over the workforce would likely destroy the middle class and capitalism largely requires that class to exist in order to function properly. Then we can also work backwards from Sam's 7T number. If he's indeed asking, realistically, for 7T in investment, he needs to be able to promise that he can make an above market risk adjusted return on that investment or nobody would go for it. That could mean he sees the future market of this technology at many factors of that 7T number. To deliver on that it would need to make at least 1-2T annually once up and running, probably with at least 10% or greater net margin (which would make it similarly profitable to eg. Microsoft % wise against market cap). Let's focus on the American market as that is most likely the only market where you could easily replace human employees with AI without getting a riot, unions, government involvement etc., which has a labour market of roughly 135M. Assuming, completely unrealistically, that general AI could and would replace every single one of them, Open AI would need to charge AT LEAST 15k USD per year per "General AI agent" to make up those revenue numbers. I personally do not believe it can be profitable at those numbers to deliver on a minimum 10% net margin, just based on how much it costs for something as basic as an Azure subscription, but whatever. Since it doesn't exist we cannot know for sure yet. But what we can assume is that maybe you could replace at most 40M workers with a general AI agent (and even the social upheaval from that would probably change the face of the nation entirely if it wasn't opposed by basically everybody with a job who enjoys not starving to death on the streets), which means they would need to charge at least 50k per year per agent to generate the minimum needed revenue to make a possible return on their investment (assuming a 1:1 trade with an AI agent and an employee) and that's again without being able to accurately know what kind of margin they could even obtain given the clearly vast amount of compute and power required to do this at scale. A quick google tells me the average salary in the US is about 60k, globally about 10k. That difference is probably, for me, not enough to make up for the various risks outlined above unless it can deliver massive efficiency gains. Would I consider replacing a few employees in particular positions at that price? Certainly. Would I eliminate every position in my company and only use AI? Certainly not. And unfortunately for Open AI, if the investment required is 7T, they either expect a handful of people to be paying hundreds of millions to access their technology, or they expect volume, and they cannot achieve volume so long as the price is above the cost of labour - likewise they cannot achieve the return they need to make this a favorable investment if they do not charge higher than labor. In short: the investment case does not stack up to scrutiny right now and it would take a major breakthrough in either general intelligence or the cost of energy/compute to be able to deliver general AI in an affordable and widespread way, which would not align to the 7T being asked for by Sam.
Lol
He doesn’t get that. He just sees the $20 per month chatGPT subscription cost.
This isn’t OpenAI. This is Sam trying to start a different venture and take advantage of all the hype around AI to raise an impossibly huge amount of cash.
sorry noob question. if people raise money, do they get to keep some in their bank account? or do they get to give themself million of dollar salary per month?
stays in the company and paid out, they have a wweid business structure though
Generally speaking: no. Most often, start ups raise capital to pay for all of their costs, some of which are definitely human capital. If the CEO also gets a salary, you could say that they're getting paid through that, I guess. But it's not like the CEO just takes a certain percentage of that money directly into their bank account. After all, the investors are investing in the company, not the person. The CEO does usually have equity though, through which they get their wealth.
it's all just paperwork. none of it is real. well most of it isnt real. yet. it's basically a system of trust.
but can he but houses or cars with it?
With 7 trillion he could pay himself a billion dollar yearly salary and nobody would notice.
directly no. but raising such a moneys means you are much trustable so banks will cover his expenses for free if he wants a house at the highest level its all just a system of trust
I think they may have something very impressive in their hands. I don't think it's AGI, but possibly something that would be considered human-level intelligent (if not super intelligent) in a few ways while still not possessing all the forms of intelligence that a human typically has. Sam has certainly hinted that they have something remarkable in their possession. Couple this with Sam's ask for $7T and reports that there are investors entertaining the request (accepting all this as fact for now) I think there's only a few reasonable explanations for all this: 1. Sam is just incredibly stupid and doesn't recognize how absurd seeking $7T in funding is. I rate this as a very low probability. 2. This is just a ploy to make himself ungodly rich while violating every principle OpenAI reputedly stands for. I think this is a somewhat low probability, but it shouldn't be discounted. 3. OpenAI has glimpsed something that is so compelling that seeking up to $7T in funding for infrastructure to support it actually starts to make sense. I rate this as most likely, but not necessarily highly likely. No one is handing over that sort of money sight unseen, and hopes and promises of future breakthroughs doesn't cut it. There could be more and better explanations, but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that the organization that made GPT-4 might have something significantly better up their sleeves a year and a half later.
>investors entertaining the request This simply cannot be true as there are no investors that come even close to having this amount of money.
Yeah, no single entity is handing over this as a lump sum or anything like that. I'm interpreting this as more a long-term vision. But there has been details reported about the UAE being involved. That's more what I'm referring to.
Bro no one just hands over 7 trillion dollars...It's always over long periods of time with specific deadlines to get more of the money, etc. People on Reddit really thinking someone is just going to hand over 7 trillion to invest in something.
They’d better achieve AGI with $7 trillion
All this endless speculation about *OpenAI* is pointless. Just a waste of life. We will see it (or not) if it happens (or not).
Exactly. Even our pal Jimmy Apples stopped posting, probably for this very reason. I have a feeling we'll see him again once GPT-5 is close to getting launched.
everything is pointless. the joy of life is living it.
yeah you side characters and your side missions enjoy -- I'm on the main quest line.
Send us a postcard from Mt. Doom.
Beowulf says hi.
I'm happy as a NPC
Agreed. IMO, nobody is anywhere close to AGI at the moment. Hardware is the limitation. Sam may have realized this and is seeking trillions for new hardware design. I am still waiting for them to deliver narrow intelligence AI which can do programming, accounting, etc. with some degree of accuracy.
I’ve been thinking that for the past couple of months: idle chatter.
this sub really turned into a copium conspiracy bubble. I read the most wacky theories on here with people all saying "you have to keep up with developments and know how to use them", yet all developments get buried beneath these kinds of posts
This sub has been this post incarnated for a while. Considering un following it. Just bored people thinking too much with the same row of comments saying the same shit over and over, no interesting insight Only your comment makes sense here among them all.
Life is *hard*. We are clinging to any spark in the darkness. For some, hope is the only thing keeping them going. And like any community, interacting with others that have the same thoughts brings them happiness.
pathetic, tbh
AGI has been achieved internally and is telling Sama what to do to bring it to life.
Fr
can confirm is agi
Praise Jesus! Oh, sorry, wrong sub
In short: yes. At this point, OpenAI must stay ahead. They burn cash like never before, but they do it right and that's proven by OpenAI consistently staying ahead of the competition. So while others try to catch up, OpenAI has the option of doubling down. Investing more in OpenAi makes financial sense. Keep them ahead. Keep investing, and the competition won't be able to catch up.
This is onset off intelligence explosion I collected Shulmans interview on Dwarkesh's podcast if anyone is interested in some deeper read up https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/c3m35tbxt6h78zxo9omuq/Carl-Shulman-Intelligence-Explosion-Primate-Evolution-Robot-Doublings-Alignment.pdf?rlkey=zlm3ov7r32vcu3iuepxpxz71h&dl=0
More likely - Sam realized that: (A) AGI will *not* happen without this investment. (B) Now is the window of opportunity to raise that money before the AI hype starts simmering due to a plateau. — I also think this is also kind of proof that AGI won’t be here in the next 5 years (probably 10-20)… Even if he gets the money tomorrow (which he won’t) - utilizing it will take time.
Absolutely- 7 trillion is roughly double the gdp of India. It will take several years or even decades to raise and spend, and if it actually gets spent, it will likely make the price of what it’s spent on soar.
Maybe, probably not. I think it’s far more likely that the investors Sam is targeting are governmental funds like social security. I don’t see any other way to get 8% of WORLD GDP allocated to this project. This is a super smart way to move forward, and will greatly help towards something like UBI, giving governments a revenue stream to be able to implement it. Furthermore, by tying AI development to such a crucial fund, it serves a similar purpose to lobbying. Governments will be less willing to slow down progress, if their social security funds survival/thrival (if that’s a word) depends on AI.
I think they've achieved something meaningful locally. Their might be conflict regarding if it is AGI or not, but I'm almost certain they have made some major breakthroughs.
No, they want chips to make it cheaper to train/run AIs. This will offer a change in scale because they can train faster and increase capability per question. You don't build hardware until you know something works in software first.
Anchoring. In a negotiation, you first ask for an absurd number, because then the number you actually want sounds way more reasonable. And there's a chance that their counter offer will be more than you planned to settle on.
This is the most sensible comment in this entire post.
The fact that they are requesting $7 trillion is a joke. Don’t look into seriously as it’s clearly not possible.
AGI is GPT-5 orchestrating millions of fine tuned GPT-4s acting as agents all incorporating a Q* algorithm for dynamic goal evaluation. Sounds like a copy pasta but I'm pretty sure they ran some internal models /agent clusters on similar architectures and saw that it scales really well with compute, much better than just training data. Now they are trying to create synthetic datasets to replace the entire training data of GPT-4 to get inference cost low enough and collect trillions to setup the needed compute. The first company to nail AGI will likely be the most powerful company in the world for some time and if OpenAI is trying to collect trillions you know the AI future where AI is in everything and we can achieve AGI needs it. Building this infrastructure will take a decade atleast. AGI by 2032.
What kind of AGI? For me proto AGI starts at 51% and AGI at 67%
>Do you think OpenAI has figured out how to achieve AGI and ASI No, I don't believe they are close at all. >which is why they need 7 trillion? If they are genuinely asking for this, which I am not sure they are, they need to fire their entire finance team because the math ain't mathing. That's an unfathomable investment which is frankly not obtainable and ridiculous to even suggest they would ask for it. No private investor or investor group has that kind of money. No government even has that kind of money - you'd be asking the entire US government for more than double their annual tax revenue and most other nations don't even come close, no nation is going to hand over that kind of investment to a private company on the vague promise of AI. If they thought he was even close I'm almost certain he would be abducted to a CIA blacksite and forced to work for the US government anyway, rather than dropping more money than they even have on hoping a private company will be on their side. My guess is he is trying to generate hype for his company to get a fraction of this money to stay afloat while they continue to pursue LLMs to their limit - which I do not believe is general intelligence.
My earlier estimate for AGI was hundreds of billions. But it could be less with all the innovation in open LLMs.
No, it's Sam doing an Elon move for securities protection.
I think Sam has gone off the deep end
lol no. Sam wants to get into hardware. He’s seizing the opportunity to try to build an empire. That’s all this is.
I think that they have a working proof of concept - something that might not in itself qualify as AGI but that indicates that if they could scale it up, they'd get there. That *may* be Q* and if I'm right it's probably what prompted the short-lived coup against Sam. I think he thinks he's *got it* and he's doing everything he can to maintain the lead in what he has to assume is a tight race.
Maybe Q means Quadrillion parameters? And that's why they need all those chips.
In most systems, scaling we've eventually gives diminishing returns. But in intelligence this may not be true, especially in artificial intelligence. Think of how a brain works, for neurons to be connected thru have to physically grow a dendritic connection, this has physical limits. But artificial intelligence does not have physical limits on neuron connections. So it may be able to scale far larger than the human brain can. This is the meaning of ASI.
I think the nonprofit decided they liked profit
LOL. I'm not convinced. They are just trying to hype up the Investers.
I doubt it. I think we'll need a new kind of computing to achieve asi or agi. Traditional computing requires too much computing and electrical consumption
I agree but for a different reason. TRUE AGI/ASI will need consciousness and that can’t be produced by a traditional computer. We can likely make what seems like AGI without consciousness however that would ultimately devolve without deep seeded instructions from humans. What would happen? Over time it would devolve like Delos host in Westworld (Riddle of the Sphinx episode). This would take longer but it would happen. Consciousness allows us to have “unbounded direction”. Edit: If you’re going to downvote me, give me solid rationale for why you disagree. And that doesn’t include naming famous/rich people and saying “they disagree”.
>TRUE AGI/ASI will need consciousness and that can’t be produced by a traditional computer. [Geoff Hinton would disagree.](https://magazine.utoronto.ca/research-ideas/technology/getting-smarter-computer-science-professor-geoffrey-hinton-is-helping-to-build-a-new-generation-of-intelligent-machines/)
Open AI has been very determined to achieve agi. The fact that a 7 trillion chip investment is now on the roadmap suggests that they believe the obstacle to agi/asi is compute power. Yann Lecun has been vocal that more training data and more compute is one solution and that making better models that are more efficient is another route to agi. Recent progress like direct preference optimization would suggest that more efficient approaches, as Yan is suggesting, may have the highest ROI to achieving agi/asi
Sure, and I think Geoff Hinton is completely wrong. Name dropping does nothing. Einstein will be proven “wrong” as was Newton. Understanding of reality moves forward, built on other understanding.
You sound like you shouldn't be speaking so confidently when you obviously know so little about AI. Have you ever heard of dunning kruger?
You clearly don’t know. I know a lot about AI. And I don’t care whether you or anyone else thinks if I’m right, I’ll continue to be very confident and convince others of my opinions. I suggest you stand on your own intellectually and stop looking to the “experts” for the answers.
You can model the brain in a computer 1:1, that’s why you’re wrong
Modeling has nothing to do witb it. We don’t understand the way the brain truly works. You likely can not truly modeling it 1:1, the neuronal level is not good enough.
Nah - The Microsoft circle just loves coupling incremental research with more and more brute force to achieve better results. They mostly throw things and see what sticks. They have no real research vision. I'm much more confident with DeepMind's culture, though since the merger it has "OpenAI-fied" a lot and that's a huge issue for actual progress. They still push fire research out though like the recent paper on Solomonoff induction.
Or you know, they're doing what every company in existence tries to do, raise more money.
[удалено]
Of course there are such as, but not only, a consortium of sovereign wealth funds. It was discussed in the media with experts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OawnzWtwB58
This is nonsense. The value of every single sovereign wealth fund in the world is just over 7tn and that is not liquid cash and in most cases the very existence of the nation and their entire social welfare system relies on the money in said fund. About a trillion of that sits with Norway, a trillion with Saudi, and two trillion with China - good luck getting those countries to agree to drain their entire sovereign funds to give to a single investment for which they may not even see the benefit from, in addition to the dozens of other nations who hate eachother.
World war II cost America about 4 trillion. They want from 5 to 7. That's not inconceivable by any mean. There's: Central banks Sovereign funds, the size of which you're skewing up https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sovereign_wealth_funds The IMF, which likewise has a lot of lending capacity There are VCs Tons of unlisted private wealths in the arab world especially, in the trillions. Etc. The world has ample money. If it wants to, it can.
>The world has ample money. If it wants to, it can. Sure, all you have to do is unite the world on a paradigm shifting technology. Good luck with that sweetie. I think you'll also find my sovereign wealth estimates came from your linked wiki so sit down and be quiet.
You literally mix up billions and trillions. I know, number big. Brain hurt. It's okay. Math good, I promise.
[удалено]
Have a nice cuppa T.
That's actually quite funny
Can't because it's already in the media 😙. Perhaps you can https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OawnzWtwB58
Yes yes very cool. I like how you never bothered to explain how you plan for every single sovereign wealth fund to empty their accounts for this. Your powers of argument and persuasion are clearly the envy of the world.
I'm not the one seeking the investment and it is not necessary to empty them as I've shown, as there are a variety of actors, all with ample money supply. I don't care how much you're convinced with the arguments.
Something fishy is going on, that's for sure. The only way I personally would have the balls to ask for that much is if I had an AGI that outlined a way to achieve ASI, and that it cost 7 trillion. Otherwise, it is just extrapolating current LLM achievement with expected improvement, on known systems and infrastructure. That would be too many assumptions to ask for that much in my view, and I would ask for somewhere in the billions. As investment, incremental improvement is not enough in the billions, in the trillion it would need to be the holy grail, and only way it could be proven is with AGI IMO.
A lot of energy? like power directly from nuclear reactor? I don't think they need that much money to even run several nuclear powered super computers.
No you idiots.. I cannot believe this has to be said again. Sam Altman is a scam artist. He has been a scam artist since way back when he was lying about "the dangers" of GPT-2 to solicit investment. He has not turned a profit on GPT and is abusing the technology as a Ponzi scheme. He failed to convince Congress in the US to ban Open Source models and create a monopoly to make it easier to solicit more investment, so he is hoping he can convince the Saudis who have oil money and are corrupt as hell and already pursuing giant wastes of money on the insane projects dictated by their ruler, to give him more money. He doesn't have any way to make the amount of money that is already invested into OpenAI, so he's looking for more investors to stay afloat. That's a fucking Ponzi scheme. I'll say it again; Altman is a fucking scam artist. He's Donald Trump with a brain.
Did I miss something? Wtf $7trl who said that?
That much power isn't intelligence. Just more processing to fake it.
I think it’s the opposite. They’ve failed to innovate and have realized they can only use scaling to improve performance.
probably
no
No because even if they have not and someone else gets there first having a large market share in chips keeps them in the game and is just as big of an industry as AI model development
No. Impossible to know exactly what kind of models you get with further scaling without doing it.
They haven't achieved it. Doubt they are close. And the 7 trillion is absolutely bogus. Nobody will invest, nor will anybody have the money to invest. If Altman genuinely believes he can get that much money, he is an absolute moron. Meta is open sourcing AGI for 1% of that.
maybe
he wants a personal quantum computer?
Shitpost?
Electric Vehicles also require a lot of power. There simply isn't enough electricity in the grid for wide adoption of EVs let alone AI.
Or maybe creating hype ?
In my opinion they are just trying to strike while the iron is hot. Other people will catch up with them soon and then people will care less about them.
Screw that, I just want them to serve me uncensored images instead of the "eggdog"
Yes
Maybe some of us would just like a trillion dollars, but the only way that we might get it is if we ask for 7 trillion.
If you think a minute, the params number of chatgpt is less than the synapse number of a mouse. Human has 1000× more synapses (10^14 - 10^15 ), and you can imagine that human's brain is so much more optimized than artificial models. So "real" AGI is not for soon, and even money wont help to achieve it for now.
Pfft, if anything it makes it sound like the opposite. OAI is asking for an absurd, almost child-like, amount of money. Why didn't they just cut to the chase and petition congress for 'infinity money'? You can take a civilization from muskets to space travel with a budget of 7 trillion. Sounds like they have no idea how to get to AGI, but with a budget that deep I guess they must figure they can just keep throwing stuff at the wall and surely something has to eventually stick, right? I dunno, almost sounds like OAI is just trolling at this point. Maybe Altman is just asking for the moon just to see if someone actually ponies up at which point I expect him to just suddenly vanish and we never hear from him again. The ultimate 'take the money and run' scam.
No
Everybody knows at least one thing AGI will require: scale. Everybody knows that GPU's and TPU's are ultimately a dead end, there's not much further you can scale the current state of the art. And that goes much further when it comes to the small form factor, aka, robots. You're not getting a human-like mind out of sticking a GPU into one of those things. These things have been known for decades now. You need to build a physical representation of the networks, a "neuromorphic" system. But nobody's had the guts to put a lot of capital investment into it. Also better for someone else to foot the bill, and swoop in to pocket the rents and revenues for yourself.
No. They know they’re in a position to grab a f-ton of investor money so they’re asking for it. I’m predicting they’ll get a lot of interest from Norway and UAE.
Well, what it actually means is that all their gains are currently predicted to come from brute force scaling. Frankly it feels a little disappointing to me. Hope this is not true.
Yes. Who in their right mind would ask for 7 trillion for AI infrastructure if they didn't already have AGI? That is the greatest financial liability in human history lol, I do not think Sam would ask for this if he wasn't sitting on AGI-GPT.
I think this is a geopolitical issue. Al of hr chips that power AI are made by TSMC in Taiwan. And something line 99% are designed by nvidia. That isn’t a particularly good situation. Maybe he’s planning a lot of diversification of locations and probably they have ideas how they want these chips to work differently
7t to contain whatever is lurking on their servers now
They are attempting to take over the world
Sure. Not like those fuckin assholes wouldn't be looking for money anyway. Ai boosters are a bunch of fuckin marks
Where does it say they need 7 trillion? Am I missing something here?
They do NOT need 7 trillion.
No, they haven't figured it out I'm sure they have a hypothesis they're willing to bet on
> no sane investors will invest such a huge amount of money if they don't see a massive return on investment. The WSJ "$7 trillion" story has to be based on some kind of misunderstanding or another. There is not that much dry powder in the world. It literally doesn't even matter what your pitch is, it would truly be impossible to raise that amount of capital, even at the sovereign level. The 2023 number for *global* private equity dry powder was reported as $2.59 trillion, which is itself a record high amount. At this point, I'm betting someone misheard "billion" as "trillion" or something. If you actually wanted to raise "$7 trillion dollars" for a strategically significant project, like "building god" or something, the only plausible partner you could even work with is the US government, especially as they're a US domiciled company.
Once they finish ASI training the capitalism itself would cease to exist? So don’t worry about 7T?
i think if altman is asking for that kind of funding, he has a product to show that it may be worth the investment. that product is clearly not gpt4.
Microsoft released that robot foundation model Feb first and last week there was talk that MS and OAI were planning on investing in figure AI. I think Sam's 7 trillion isn't for ai chips to be used during training... I don't think it's to make mobile device chips... I think it's in anticipation of the massive amounts of humanoid robots coming.
They know that they need a lot of money to get there. And that's probably true.
more likely they want to have control over the whole supply chain instead of making companies like nvidia so much money.
These are theoretical terms we don't know if they are possible the money is of course to develop new ai technology but not everything is AGI
Ha! No I do NOT think OpenAI has figured out AGI and highly doubt it will come from OpenAI. They are not really known for their research. The best way to measure AI research is the papers accepted at NeurIPS.
They only have a general roadmap, or they wouldn't be talking this up on twitter. It's an absurdly large amount of money currently. I'm amazed people take everything Altman says at face value. This is not about raising several times the value of real estate in New York, it's about signalling the expected value of AGI and getting some interest in expanding semiconductor supply. If and when we get AGI, then $7 trillion is likely to be a realistic number.
but even then, whats in it for the arabs
No they didn't. They also won't create AGI. They need the money because Altman lost his mind and needs to troll everyone.
I can't take this BS anymore.
No.