It is amazing how this crowd in HN reacts to AI news coming out of OpenAI compared to other competitors like Google or FB. Today there was another news about Google releasing their AI in GCP and mostly the comments were negative. The contrast is clearly visible and without any clear explanation for this difference I have to suspect that maybe something is being artificially done to boost one against the other.
We all could use ChatGPT for quite a while now. I remember making my Polish boyfriend laugh by letting it write Polish poems and song texts related to our lives. It was free, fast and simple. ChatGPT is so simple, I could probably teach my grandmother how to use it.
Or it could be that Google and FB are both incumbents scrambling to catch up with OpenAI, who is a much smaller competitor that is disrupting the space?
In what way is Google scrambling to catch up? In my opinion PaLM-E is more impressive than GPT-4. Additionally Google do not have the same incentive to publicise what they’ve worked on as much as OpenAI. Google has had similarly performant LLMs the whole time. Who were the publishers of the “Attention is all you need” paper, of which almost everything OpenAI has been credited for is built upon?
Google had an AI announcement where you could neither use it or even signup for a wait list to use it. What sort of response is an announcement like that supposed to get?
Google's announcement is almost irrelevant. PaLM already has a paper, so it's not new, and there isn't even a wait list to use it, so the announcement is pretty moot.
Meta's llama has been thoroughly discussed so I'm not sure what you mean.
The clear explanation is that neither Google nor Meta have had "ChatGPT" moments—everyone and their grandmothers have tried OpenAIs LLM so it's hardly surprising that people are excited for the follow-up.
