[ehnto]

> but this is a pretty obvious monetization path that they just can't not take

Now that they are a commercial entity, you are right. If they had remained on their original mission path though I suspect this wouldn't be the no-brainer it is now.

[jstummbillig]

The "original mission path" was a) not viable and b) would not have included a product to begin with. So it actually is a no-brainer: None of this would apply, because ChatGPT simply would not exist.

[ehnto]

Not viable to achieve what?

[jstummbillig]

Not viable to achieve the stated goal of creating AGI (originally) as a non-profit, because the best way anyone has so far figured how to maybe do that is apparently too expensive, both in terms of capex and opex.

[Gud]

Perhaps if they had remained true to their original mission, they would have been able to recruit the genius required.

[rhetocj23]

Lol this is delusional.

If the latter was true, Google would take its tremendous cash balance and earnings and reinvest into what is necessary to reach AGI right now.

OAI has a funding problem. Google in comparison most certainly does not. Google could go raise funding for it right now too.

The real issue is the lack of confidence behind the supposed theory that more aggressive reinvestment yields AGI.

[TZubiri]

Google invests millions in AI since forever, see DeepMind team's trajectory, TPUs, etc...

[rhetocj23]

Millions? Thats peanuts dude compared to what OAI is proposing in future requests of funding.