I don’t think they said they were “better”, if I recall they did “almost as much with far less resources”. and really the bigger thing was they were releasing a lot as open source.
IMO I think that’s what the real tech giants are worried about. Honestly I think I’m actually seeing the real goal of AI… and the worse part of it is, AI is the secondary feature.
Sam Altmen made a comment on wanting to see basically compute sold as like a utility to people. Crucial is getting out of selling hardware to people. I’m leaning towards the idea that the ballooning hardware costs isn’t a side effect, it’s the primary intention. The idea of it is basically to move all of computing to a model more like Netflix, or say what Googles stadia gaming console was etc…
The goal is a future where personal PCs are a rare luxury like power generators. For normal use we get crappy thin clients to connect to cloud services with our software. Super government and corporate friendly. Everything super accessible by government and scannable for AI training etc… Encryption can basically become meaningless because they can log straight into the machines.
China’s a big threat because… they could encourage in house models. IE an agent that runs in your house, or companies run them in their server rooms, and most importantly they can be trained individually with your personal data and company data, without creating the privacy and security nightmares of wondering if chatgpt could share all of your personal information with a random dude or competing company. Plus if we are talking individual hardware, that hurts the actual overall goal of shifting all focus of all hardware manufacturers towards data center modules that consumers and even medium sized businesses can only rent.
Sam Altmen made a comment on wanting to see basically compute sold as like a utility to people.
Meh, that idea is as old as Compute itself. In the early days, basically the 50’s into the 80’s, you had dumb terminals that only provided a connection to the actually powerful centralized hardware. Think mainframe although it went by different terms at different times.
Every decade or so someone like Altman regurgitates the concept and to date no one has been able to make it widely successful. For example Microsoft has been chasing it since the NT4 days when they licensed multi-session technology from Citrix and rebranded it as “Remote Desktop Services”. It’s still in use today by corporations but outside of particular industries with high demands for secure remote access you’ll almost never see it.
So the idea and actual implementations of it have been around for decades but it never catches on because it’s always more expensive, less performant, and less flexible than hoped for.
With that said if you cock your head and squint we kinda sorta reached it with all the browser and app based online services like e-mail, listening to music, etc. Kinda. It breaks down though in the exact place that it always has…when you want to create something more involved than a text document. Suddenly it’s back to it being more expensive, less performant, and less flexible than doing it on local hardware.
Missing the key point though… your general concept is absolutely right… it’s failed over and over again because it can’t keep up with the fact that it’s cheaper and better performance with what you can buy locally, on top of bandwidth access etc… But there’s 2 ways to make one product a more common option, option A, try to make the one you want them to use better, but with AI they’ve done something different, they are working towards making local systems worse.
Key point is, the direction of attack. Instead of making remote compute better, cheaper, faster etc… what if the attack is make local hardware, more expensive, harder to get, less reliable, or even illegal.
Right now, all of that is happening, on top of course of windows being more bloated, hardware costs are multiplying at a rate never seen before, even for outdated hardware. Netflix and spotify have already adapted the public into no longer buying physical medium for movies and music, and as people are also noting, governments making more and more regulations come in place on say OS’s needing age gates, 3d printers needing to report to the government etc… It’s literally an orchestrated perfect storm to be pushing people away from owning computers.
The point is they aren’t trying to “catch up” to local hardware, they are trying to hinder the ability to obtain local hardware.
I don’t think they said they were “better”, if I recall they did “almost as much with far less resources”. and really the bigger thing was they were releasing a lot as open source.
IMO I think that’s what the real tech giants are worried about. Honestly I think I’m actually seeing the real goal of AI… and the worse part of it is, AI is the secondary feature.
Sam Altmen made a comment on wanting to see basically compute sold as like a utility to people. Crucial is getting out of selling hardware to people. I’m leaning towards the idea that the ballooning hardware costs isn’t a side effect, it’s the primary intention. The idea of it is basically to move all of computing to a model more like Netflix, or say what Googles stadia gaming console was etc…
The goal is a future where personal PCs are a rare luxury like power generators. For normal use we get crappy thin clients to connect to cloud services with our software. Super government and corporate friendly. Everything super accessible by government and scannable for AI training etc… Encryption can basically become meaningless because they can log straight into the machines.
China’s a big threat because… they could encourage in house models. IE an agent that runs in your house, or companies run them in their server rooms, and most importantly they can be trained individually with your personal data and company data, without creating the privacy and security nightmares of wondering if chatgpt could share all of your personal information with a random dude or competing company. Plus if we are talking individual hardware, that hurts the actual overall goal of shifting all focus of all hardware manufacturers towards data center modules that consumers and even medium sized businesses can only rent.
Killing the consumer hardware market is hand in hand with killing 3d printing and chat control.
Meh, that idea is as old as Compute itself. In the early days, basically the 50’s into the 80’s, you had dumb terminals that only provided a connection to the actually powerful centralized hardware. Think mainframe although it went by different terms at different times.
Every decade or so someone like Altman regurgitates the concept and to date no one has been able to make it widely successful. For example Microsoft has been chasing it since the NT4 days when they licensed multi-session technology from Citrix and rebranded it as “Remote Desktop Services”. It’s still in use today by corporations but outside of particular industries with high demands for secure remote access you’ll almost never see it.
So the idea and actual implementations of it have been around for decades but it never catches on because it’s always more expensive, less performant, and less flexible than hoped for.
With that said if you cock your head and squint we kinda sorta reached it with all the browser and app based online services like e-mail, listening to music, etc. Kinda. It breaks down though in the exact place that it always has…when you want to create something more involved than a text document. Suddenly it’s back to it being more expensive, less performant, and less flexible than doing it on local hardware.
Missing the key point though… your general concept is absolutely right… it’s failed over and over again because it can’t keep up with the fact that it’s cheaper and better performance with what you can buy locally, on top of bandwidth access etc… But there’s 2 ways to make one product a more common option, option A, try to make the one you want them to use better, but with AI they’ve done something different, they are working towards making local systems worse.
Key point is, the direction of attack. Instead of making remote compute better, cheaper, faster etc… what if the attack is make local hardware, more expensive, harder to get, less reliable, or even illegal.
Right now, all of that is happening, on top of course of windows being more bloated, hardware costs are multiplying at a rate never seen before, even for outdated hardware. Netflix and spotify have already adapted the public into no longer buying physical medium for movies and music, and as people are also noting, governments making more and more regulations come in place on say OS’s needing age gates, 3d printers needing to report to the government etc… It’s literally an orchestrated perfect storm to be pushing people away from owning computers.
The point is they aren’t trying to “catch up” to local hardware, they are trying to hinder the ability to obtain local hardware.