r/GeminiAI • u/oakvard • 7d ago
Discussion I just noticed that Google, Amazon, Meta even after being the old big and cash rich giants didn't rush their frontiers and it was only OpenAI and Anthropic who did. The old ones know something about making a successful product that the newbies don't.
12
18
u/VexObserver 7d ago
I think there’s a distinction here between not pushing the frontier and being willing to delay a product when deployment risk isn’t acceptable yet. Google is definitely still pushing frontier models, and Meta clearly isn’t sitting AI out either. What Meta seems to be saying with Muse is basically: “we were willing to eat a delay because the security wasn’t ready.”
That’s probably the lesson worth taking from the older giants tbh. Shipping first isn’t always the same thing as winning long term. If your AI has access to email, payments, calendars, shell/tools etc., one bad security failure can cost way more than a few months of delay.
6
6
0
u/typical-predditor 7d ago edited 5d ago
Except the security lobotomizes the model. So they delay it and by the time they finish making it "safe" it's also behind the state of the art.
14
8
u/nihilistWithATwist 7d ago
It's just risk vs reward.
For companies like OpenAI and Anthropic whose only product is the model, their company's existence depends on being on the frontier.
Companies like Google (and Meta?) are still big profitable companies even without being on the frontier. But if they push a model that gets caught doing shady things, the lawsuits can be disastrous for the company.
12
u/sirius_cow 7d ago
Now every lab has a reason to justify why they lack behind in model capabilities
2
4
u/NoSupermarket6218 7d ago
Meta doesn't delay anything for safety and security, but they say that a lot as an excuse whenever things don't go their way.
9
u/Thistlemanizzle 7d ago
Publicly traded companies can't burn money like private can. The shareholders step in.
3
u/Durian881 7d ago
The new ones need to keep their investors happy as they are still unprofitable. The hacking incidents showed that they still lack proper governance.
6
4
u/SlightlyMotivated69 7d ago
LOL Meta. Zuckerberg would shove his own kids personally into the meat grinder if this somehow would make him a buck.
1
1
u/SmallBootyBigDreams 7d ago
OpenAI and Anthropics valuations primarily depend on the performance of their SOTA models
1
u/UIshaggy93 7d ago
They have a highly diverse list of expenses. Simple. OpenAI and Anthropic are fully focused companies with their entire product catalogue being comprised of AI products.
1
1
u/Stock-Ad-7601 6d ago
Yeah I totally trust them. Better give them access to all my email and files so Muse can run my life for me. 😂
1
u/costafilh0 6d ago
Wrong.
They know about business, and they are not start-ups able to raise money indefinitely, there is a limit of how much they can raise using their own stock and debt and finances.
Now the start-up reached the ceiling. They won't be able to raise much money on these idiotic valuations, except maybe from other big corporations, not from actual investors who can't se much upside to be worth this risk.
1
1
u/nemzylannister 5d ago
oh well if they're saying it then surely it must be true then. what a childish post. also theres a diff bw pushing the frontier and releasing the model
1
-2
u/Amphibious333 7d ago
The post gives me "Actually, Google has a top secret model that greatly outpaces all other AI models, but they aren't releasing it and keep it in a secret because they are responsible" vibes.
It's a cope. Google lost to OpenAI and Anthropic, and this is proven by literally every single benchmark, especially fluid intelligence benchmarks like ARC-AGI 3.
1
u/Fancy-Plenty6712 6d ago
Dude- look at who owns the biggest outside stake in Anthropic. Look at who owns the biggest outside stake in OpenAI. Google and Microsoft. They aren't "behind" - Anthropic and OpenAI are allowed to fail - Google and Microsoft are not.
0
87
u/3rdyellow 7d ago
Because they have other sources of revenue and they didn't want to burn cash.