Where’s the EU regulators at hahaha

@@LogicallyAnswered Hmmmmmm ..... ; Coup/Comrade/Traitor Trump is the bestest super-secret double-agent the-Dems could ever hope for to single-handedly destroy the-GOP. If Trump's the GOP candidate for president, the-Dems will sweep all 3 branches of gov & then yoor darwinian laissez-faire crazy capitalism is screwed buddy especially mega-tech companies.

​@@LogicallyAnsweredthe question is where is US's?

Dunno about the EU, but we broke free and UK restrictions are incoming. EU will probably be "what the UK said" and a bit to make them feel important.

@@MrWillypanda88 they are already bribed

True. Companies that get big like this tend to forget what made them successful in the first place. A hard working and dedicated team with leadership that shows loyalty to them working on a product designed to appeal to the desires of their customer base. The larger they get, the more they bring in people and ask "How can we get this to people who are not yet customers?" instead of asking "How can we continue to appeal to our customers so they tell others how great our product is and market it for us?" Seriously, make a good product and it sells itself. You don't need to then dump millions into marketing, you just need to play to your strengths and let the work speak for itself. For example, Pepsi and Coca-Cola. For a long time, the soda giants were battling with each other over TV commercials and product placement, trying to appeal to their competitors customer base... but in the end, they realized everyone out there knows them already. Everyone out there either likes a specific brand, dislikes one of them, or just doesn't care which one they get. Restaurants have one or the other and are unlikely to change, and a Pepsi fan is not going to change his mind because he saw a commercial either. This is why you barely see any advertisement anymore for these things. Twitter wasn't successful because of marketing and convincing people to use it, it was successful because they listened to their customers and gave them what they wanted. Remember when messages were limited to 140 characters? The customers demanded more, and they doubled the length. This change alone brought in a large portion of people who had either quit or were on the fence because they could not express themselves. Their downfall and reason they sold was because they lost sight of this vision, and could no longer accurately give the users what they wanted. You could even say they went too far and started giving in to demands from small groups of users with loud voices rather than supporting the majority of users, and that twisted the space into a warzone because things were changing that the average user didn't want or care about. They started using anti-consumer practices against the everyman while all they cared about were their super popular and wealthy users rather than the majority which outweighs the few.

They've fallen for the idea that people never know what they want and need to be told it

@@maudleyFYI I learned the hard way that people that think this think slavery is a normal part of life they are entitled to exploit. More of us are in jobs that fit the modern day slavery metrics than we realize. When I was sex trafficked I went to look it up and fount out that I worked one intellectual slave job and another labor slave job that led to me being homeless and sex trafficked. I was shocked to learn that right now there are around 50 million slaves on earth that we estimate. During ALL 400 years of the Atlantic slave trade there were estimated 12-14 million slaves trafficked. It is unreal that they did this while brainwashing most of us to think slavery was over. They really did move the chains from bodies to minds and it is time we break those chains! ⛓️

That's their whole principle. Their only loss was windows Phone which they could have done better if they had a better app Store and started early

@@santhoshkumar2270 agree. Even if only they could manage to make the app store better they would have gotten with it.

@@santhoshkumar2270 that was a while ago, I assume they meant even more recent years, since that's what I'd agree with

Great CEO

@@santhoshkumar2270 windows phone was great, problem was the lack of third party support.

Most charitable explanation is that Zucc's Metaverse has been ridiculously future-proofed and built for ability to scale, all the money went to the back-end and front-end is a crappy placeholder. But this raises the obvious question, why not let the thing cook first before showing it to the public? you can only have one first impression.

Zuckerberg simply had to create the infrastructure for this concept and allowed for individuals to come in and handle the whole direction of meta from design to app interconnectivity. Meta should've been a better Roblox and their focus should've been growing alongside creators who took up the mantle of creating on their platform. A Ready player one like platform will come to exist but it's going to come slowly and with a lot of cultural milestone driven by consumers and creatives not platforms trying to manufacture that reality.

"Maybe starting smaller, making something less ambitious but incredibly good might have saved Meta a shit ton of money while still creating something truly impressive" You know Second Life has existed for 20 years right?

@@archvaldor I actually didn't, I'll have to document myself about it. Thanks ma boi

You may have missed the point of the book

​@@BancheisThat was insightful. Thanks for the comment!

I saw a video of a lead game developer talk about how long it took to write a simple table lookup code/value comparison code, and how it took 4 weeks to do something he could do in a few minutes.

other than some of his rhethoric, i actually like what he is doing

Did you know trump’s ancestor started that crap by hiring actors to pretend they found gold and sell shovels?!?!? That family has been harming us since they got here and it’s time we stopped allowing them to abuse their power if you ask me. I was just floored that their crimes started that early. I bet his shovel selling ancestor is very proud of him now….. 🤦‍♀️

Mine the miners !!!

Woah, That’s meta!!!

Hahaha

You have lost something. You do realise that we live in dead space? The system itself doesn't support abundance for everyone. Two spectrums have to be there for the economy to function.

​@@esfasia9835Can you further elaborate

Would you invest, or give your money to such companies?

Bs

Google bard was a big stumble for Google.

@@internet_userr they just released there weakest model. It cost to show results, so they are saving money.

I’d also argue and say google is most successful company to use AI. All most all the tools use some form is AI it’s just that it’s not that in your face like chatGPT.

they are justing saving face with bard, i dont know why, recently i tried PALM2 with its API and its a absolute beast, comparable to gpt4 and its logical reason is nearly perfect according to my tests, i even gave it differential equation and the result was correct 4/10 times, got gpt 3.5 its 0/10, for non techies google may not be good but for who are into that space knows how much ahead google is, they literally have the technology more then all the AI startups combined, and via APIs they are giving it for free, and with high rate limit.

Me too

I too remember Geocities. Putting a .midi file in your page and playing music, setting up the page to truly express who you are on a personal level, and essentially working as a virtual introduction to you as if you just gave a business card and speech to a person. It was a great way to be visible on the internet.

I'm only 50. I'm way too young to be on Facebook. My mom uses Facebook.

Hardened Firefox bro 🙏

Savage take

Edge is the best browser now, even with the invasion of privacy.

@@millabasset1710 i make a good bit of pocket change from the Microsoft points and it runs video streaming sights better than most. I'll give them that.

@@millabasset1710 not even close

The word "materialistic" is really misused. Life is changing overtime in a fast way, and every X amount of time, another product becomes a must to live. You'll be at a huge disadvantage if you don't purchase the next essential thing. Like, everyone should have a smartphone, but you don't have to buy a new one every year.

People always forget to attach "overly" before "materialistic". Life is always improved with money - people who claim otherwise are simply spoiled by already having it. The crux is in knowing when to cut back on getting more money and to switch to actually enjoying the benefits it produces in your life.

There you go 😊

You can literally still use it today, if people would randomly migrate to MySpace others will follow.

I remember trolling randoms there, best times

best?? why dead then?

Your space was just ok

Yup, This video talked a lot about how people were only clowning on Bard because it looked like a copy cat and I'm like l, dude have you actually USED bard? I've used it since launch day and it is nowhere near as good as chatGPT. Like you said Google made bad decisions with AI, and that includes putting out their transformers research for free, which is now the foundation for openAIs entire approach to AI.

I think it's too early to make the conclusion. The race haven't ended yet.

100% google bard is currently better than chat gpt. I only use Bard. Chat Gpt is an AI that sounds like a lecturer I hated in college. It's a lobotomized AI that's stuck in 2021. You can never compare it to bard. I can give Bard a screen shot of an app and have Bard spit out flutter code for that screen shot. How incredible is that!

​@@marilynlucas5128 It's still not as good as GPT4, which does have Internet access as a feature just like bard. It's supposed to be multi-modal as well, at least the API is.

So disappointed that Meta's strides in the OpenAI scene wasn't mentioned in this video

Using ai for analytics and launching ai products are different though :)

Yep, unfortunately so for meta

Thanks chad!

Apple is far behind, they just copied meta for their own VR product hype. Nvidia has already won the AI war, in a couple years the results will speak for themselves.

Even apple would not make a dent. You completely forget the software moat around Nvidia and the fact that the M series of SOCs are horrible for AI. No one is using those.

Really appreciate the feedback man, will look into that

How do you manage to get 1+1 to equal 7? American moment 😂

Twitter/X is not a profitable company. How do you define that as succes? Stupid!

Any rich kid can buy things but few can grow them to be better…. Many were abused so they were taught how to abuse by their parents….. Just reality. I judge people by the health of how they impact themselves and others so Elon is a failure in my book. Money does nothing if you don’t have the maturity to do healthy things with it. Then those people just end up harming themselves and others. Life is always healthier when things are more equitable so people are treated as equal and meritocracy can happen. But this is crony capitalism where criminals push any healthy people out that they can. I am a mixed race person that grew up a millionaire and became homeless and disabled after college before moving back to my parents house to heal from things like Gabby Pettito died from, I literally have her same injuries and I want others to learn from me because I somehow survived to heal more each day.

Thanks as always Daniel!

Hahaha

OpenAi is owned by Microsoft

Thanks man!

Ah, wasn't sure how many people would get the analogy. Glad to see you liked it!

10:35 Let's start of with just the small bit on NVIDIA. The Idea that NVIDIA could be "making AI" instead of just selling the tools is ridiculous. AI is tools and techniques most of which were made at universities or made public to advanced technical capability, while NVIDIA is a hardware design company. They have no way to stop AI being done on other peoples platform nor the technical capacity built up to make use of it. There is a reason that a lot of AI development has happened at social media companies, which is that you need data to build the actual AI components, and you need to custom build for the actual magnetizable end use case, makes them the natural companies to lead the field. NVIDIA is a hardware focused company with no clear way to make actual end products. NVIDIA trying to lock in and in someway "own" AI, besides completely destroying the current nature of the company by trying to conglomertize, is to try to get the tools to make AI be locked into NVIDIA hardware. Which they have, to a degree of success, mostly by keeping the core parts of the tools they use for scientific compute and AI closed source, while still encouraging open source products to develop on it, making a locked in ecosystem, and by making hardware improvements, from architecture to entire new chip series, so in addition to being hard leaving NVIDIA will leave you will also at the end be worse off. They are seeing the payoff right now of higher risk higher reward commitment to AI right now, they have annoyed people with there lock-in attempts and burnt a lot of money on hardware innovation that would mostly only payoff if AI took of, especially compared to AMD. They did gamble on being the next big thing. They just won, for now.

That brings me to the big part. OpenAI has not won AI by any means. Bing was profitable (after a decade of losses) in fact more profitable per user than Google; Now it's a money bonfire. None of the most important problems for use of AI in this type of space have been solved, and it is not possible to reduce cost per query to sane levels without lobotomizing the model so hard it is complete shit. They are going to be ripped apart as Microsoft tries to justifies the money that has been shoveled in, and are now bolted to a poor use of AI tech that is going nowhere fast in the near term. What everyone wants is a search engine that gaslights you and is to expensive for any company to run without shaking you down. They are only looking like they are winning because they are the focal point of a massive bubble. Cloud compute and technical support and tools is probably a big part the future for AI. One which Google, Facebook, and Amazon are perfectly positioned for. AI is more a technology than a product, we are in a phase where actual profitable deployment is a massive problem for what is currently possible, this requires actually finding viable use cases, making the deployable models, and deploying them efficiently. The current technically feasible use cases are eclectic and hard to identify, the big firms should not be putting massive bets on any of them individually, ideally people in those fields and industries can self Identify and pilot viability on there own, while the big AI firms focus on expanding what is technically possible and making what is already possible more efficient. This points towards making platforms, trying to make building more capable AI models easier for people with less expertise, to increase self discovery of profitable uses, and selling deployment of these solutions so that you can invisibly work on optimizing underling usage while getting paid for all the actual successful uses. Amazon is the leader in Enterprise cloud solutions, has experience deploying AI solutions at scale (eg. Alexa, though that is also burning money) and some respectable research expertise and creditably built up. Facebook has lots of data and experience deploying these types of products at scale, and a world leading AI department for research. Google is already a large deployer of AI models in there search, social media, and advertising business, this is addition to experience in with consumer facing tools, enterprise solutions, a respectable enterprise cloud and a decent AI team with a good track record. Microsoft is the enterprise cloud #2 and a enterprise software leader that has now acquired a AI research leader. Which looks respectable, but they have far less experience deploying AI at scale, have bolted OpenAI on rather than endogenously growing it, which is notoriously dangerous and saddles a lot of pressure and distorted expectations to make what they where acquired to do work, even if it is a bad idea instead of just making the tech better, and finally Microsoft has a notoriously strange and hyper competitive culture. The OpenAI looks like pretty much the worse case scenario for an acquisition, with a high change of OpenAI being completely destroyed by Microsoft infighting when the current AI hype cycle ends.

I have to agree with you. Im surprised not many others pointed this out too in the comments. Great video at the start but really poor final conclusion in the last few minutes. It jumped from software to hardware in a really bad way. Yes, some of the FAANG these days blur the lines between software and hardware, but to imply that even the biggest software oriented company like Facebook could just overnight accomplish and reach what Intel, AMD and Nvidia have been doing for decades, is in my opinion, quite ridiculous and badly informed take.

Thank you Balpreet!

Glad to hear that man!

Thanks for the feedback man