When I think of OpenAI hardware I can't help but think of Akins Laws of Spacecraft Design [0]:
> 39. Any exploration program which "just happens" to include a new launch vehicle is, de facto, a launch vehicle program.
Having a Jony Ive project on the side isn't going to do squat for OpenAI—if they're going to go into consumer hardware that's going to need to be an all-consuming strategic pivot, which their other moves suggest they're not doing. They're currently in spaghetti at the wall mode with Jony Ive as just one bet among many, which is a very bad way to approach a new piece of consumer hardware that's meant to compete with Apple.
> if they're going to go into consumer hardware that's going to need to be an all-consuming strategic pivot
You have to build a phone.
There is no other way to get the data you need to make XR glasses, AI pebble, Rabbit etc work the way people expect without it. Because Apple and Google are well within the rights to deny the siphoning of your private data to a company like OpenAI who only exists because of large scale trademark abuse.
monkeyelite · 1d ago
This sounds backwards. Making a best selling phone ecosystem to get started on the AI project?
makeitdouble · 9h ago
This is the cost of having a major mobile operating system completely closed, and the other one only half welcoming. We're missing on an unfathomable amount of innovation because of it.
That's where Samsung went all in on building it's own ecosystem.
vessenes · 1d ago
It’s a proprietary data stream that they can control: mission critical.
lolinder · 1d ago
But the point is that you're going to have a hard time bootstrapping a new phone ecosystem in the current environment. If it's mission critical then they need to be throwing everything at it, not doing it as one option among many.
vessenes · 18h ago
I agree whole heartedly that it’s going to be really hard to get my iPhone out of my hands, for a host of reasons. That said, would I replace my AirPods with a Bluetooth version that has zero latency 4o, cameras on the stems and Chat over Siri? Um, yes, in a nanosecond. If that AirPod replacement needed a small brick with cellular backhaul that lived in my bag, and could make calls for me, would I use it? Yep, some of the time.
I think there’s a lot of space for device innovation right now. A quick survey of sci-fi ideas yields a lot of possibilities:
Lapel pins that talk to you
Earrings / Earcuffs that talk to you
Directed environmental audio that only you can hear
Drones that attach to you, fly around when you or they want, and then .. talk to you
Projection on arbitrary surfaces
Smart surfaces everywhere that show things
Anyway. We’re not done innovating data and compute connectivity in device form in my opinion. And, I think we would both do well to remember that how hard it is to sell me, or you, on a new phone, is massively different if you’re willing to give away your first 100mm phones.
That said I’m not convinced the next thing they’re putting out is a phone. But it might be a phone killer, or a baby thing that will one day be a phone killer.
herbstein · 23h ago
Interestingly, isn't that almost exactly what Garmin has done with their wearable ecosystem? A massive data collection people willingly agree to because of the perceived benefits.
lolinder · 21h ago
Garmin was a long-standing well-respected consumer hardware company that started releasing a miniaturized version of the thing they were famous for: a GPS. They already had brand recognition and all the infrastructure to build quality products that people would trust.
That infrastructure and brand is extremely difficult to bootstrap.
beAbU · 16h ago
I cannot see how a new mobile phone platform can build any kind of moat with AI. Especially if I get 90% of what I need from an android/iOS app.
The only way new bespoke hardware will ever work is if its the only way to get access to their AGI agent or something.
conartist6 · 1d ago
But aren't they building a necklace?
ethbr1 · 1d ago
Necklaces have existed for a while. This is novel.
I believe the preferred terminology is "drone collar"
detourdog · 1d ago
or digital collar and lesh.
disqard · 1d ago
Not invasive enough for me! I'm holding out for my neural implant, with glial scarring... mmmm, can't wait!
rl3 · 1d ago
>0:25: A brief glimpse of Altman’s shoes, which we’ve identified as the LEGO x Adidas UltraBoost DNA, is seen as he walks through the Financial District.
Funny his shoes in the Jony Ive video share a similar aesthetic to the very Google stage he was calling out. It gets better when you consider Google's only recently begun starting to kick OpenAI's ass, and all without fake-ass coffee shop extras.
The lengths people go to try to appear "real" never ceases to amuse. Surely there's a formal term for this? Perhaps the Zuckerberg effect.
"Disappointed it doesn’t simulate the experience of stepping on a lego brick by accident"
detourdog · 1d ago
Can you provide some context such as who ms.inopinatus is adn where they commented.
prawn · 1d ago
Given their username, I assume they are just relaying a comment from their partner.
LambdaComplex · 1d ago
And the "where" was probably the living room, or perhaps the kitchen
yread · 23h ago
Indeed, hopefully they have better things to talk about in the bedroom
detourdog · 1d ago
Thanks for the guidance. I couldn't figure out what the what. I thought inopinatus was a top level domain.
I'm so far out of touch I have never heard of the Lego Adidas shoe partnership.
inopinatus · 1d ago
I can confirm that I am indeed a top level domain
detourdog · 1d ago
You should check your DNS as you are currently unroutable.
ms.inopinatus sure has some kink.
danpalmer · 1d ago
> 3:23: Altman: “Jony recently gave me one of the prototypes ... and I think it is the coolest piece of technology that the world will have ever seen.”
> We have more than five minutes left. Spoiler alert: That’s the only detail about the device that’s in the entire video. —KT
There's a lot of hype building going on for very little detail. Similar feeling to the Humane teaser videos from a year or two before they launched.
prawn · 1d ago
I don't buy it, but I liked the idea someone else mentioned that the prototype were the glasses Ive was wearing in the hero shot of their wedding announcement, and could infer intent from subvocal recognition and refer instruction via bone conduction.
danpalmer · 1d ago
This is practically just fanfiction though. The glasses obviously don't contain any compute - Ive is great at industrial design but not electronics – and subvocal mics can't work unless you attach them to your throat, otherwise there's nothing to pick up. It's a neat idea in the same way that I think teleportation would be better than cars, I wonder why we aren't doing that instead.
But also, you don't go to all the effort of preparing glasses that are 10 years ahead of the industry and wearing them in a video... only to not have a big reveal. There has to be a pay off to the marketing, and saying "one more thing, we were wearing these last year" in their product announcement doesn't get them anything.
prawn · 1d ago
Yeah, like I said, I don't buy it, just the concept that it was hidden in plain sight was a fun idea. Otherwise it's an even weirder photo...
micromacrofoot · 1d ago
these guys aren't inventing new technologies, there are only so
many combinations of components this could be
prawn · 1d ago
Your guesses?
micromacrofoot · 11h ago
phone hardware in some form factor optimized for listening and watching so AI can respond
this has been what most attempts at new tech have been for like a decade... a smartphone on your wrist, a smartphone strapped to your face, tv that's a shitty smartphone, a lapel pin smartphone...
detourdog · 1d ago
I felt that once Jobs was gone and Ives took over the gui of the iPhone that iOS started to degrade.
throwaway-11-1 · 1d ago
Jony literally put the guy from packaging in charge of UI, if you wonder why iOS 7 has such garish colors (white glyphs were unreadable on the green app icon containers etc) its because they're were doing design reviews on paper and the team didn't understand CMYK to RGB. It was like watching a room full of adults learn to ride a bike.
detourdog · 1d ago
It sure felt like that. I studied industrial design. Robert Bruner was the designer that hired Ives. Bruner gave his standard design slideshow to my class. His spiel was that he was into boxology. Which is how he described the process of finding the macintoshes form factor (after Frog Design). I always saw Ives talent in that vein.
I have been naming my iPhones since 5 or 6 soap because they are like holding a wet bar of soap. I’m not expecting earth shattering product.
I think Ives real talent is in materials and fabrication.
monkeyelite · 1d ago
Oof. I don’t know if this true but I have seen the print designer try to do digital and it’s painful. I think these designers don’t realize that a UI is a system with pieces and rules that adapt, and not a fixed drawing.
danpalmer · 1d ago
> because they're were doing design reviews on paper and the team didn't understand CMYK to RGB
Huh. Do you have a reference for this? If this is in a book or something I'm interested to read more about this backstory.
detourdog · 1d ago
I have no proof but I remember my shock at how contrast colors were poor due to not offering enough connrast. A good physical example was Apple printing serial numbers with white numbers on a grey background.
detourdog · 1d ago
The referenced article sure did make these two endeavor seem out of touch. The pointlessness of the Lego Adidas integration makes me question the judgment of the wearer.
furyofantares · 1d ago
This whole thing is reminiscent of "IT" to me, when the story about this encounter was going around
> Kamen showed it to Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos and John Doerr. Bezos reportedly made his "loud, honking laugh" of appreciation. Jobs said it would cause people to re-architect cities and compared its importance to the PC. Doerr likened IT in magnitude to the Internet and then invested in it.
But there were zero public details about what "IT" was. (IT was the Segway.)
Speaking of Steve Jobs, I think the reason the "sam and jony" page looks like a wedding announcement crossed with an Apple advertising -- down to the url https://openai.com/sam-and-jony (which you should visit if the only thing youve seen is the 'how we met' video TFA is breaking down) -- is because it's trying to frame Sam as Jony's new Steve Jobs.
vessenes · 1d ago
Arguably the first vc backed company to use guerilla marketing. (I await counter examples)
In segways case, not only was it a little underwhelming compared to the buzz, GW Bush flipped headfirst over it during a demo drive. I imagine that had some moderating impact on launch.
roryirvine · 1d ago
"I think IT's a hoverboard!", "no, IT's a jetpack!", "no, IT's a Star Trek transporter!"...
The speculation about Altman & Ive's new product rhymes perfectly, so it's fair to expect just as great a disappointment when they finally unveil the reality.
threeseed · 1d ago
OpenAI is becoming like Tesla.
Their first mover advantage is gone, they are unable to innovate on their core product and everything that is said or done is hyped to the extreme.
And now trying to move into adjacent categories where there is no clear problem to be solved and is putting them up against the biggest players in the industry.
ignoramous · 1d ago
> ...trying to move into adjacent categories where there is no clear problem to be solved...
Smartphones/PCs/wearables, browsers, social media, & IDEs are absolutely important to any company wanting to sell increasingly more capable models that understand our world better with each passing year (provided the scale hypothesis keeps up): For the control over both the hardware and the OS, and for the amount of data that can be fed back to the training set.
Google (and to varying extents Microsoft & Meta) can leverage their existing products or distribution advantages. Given the how frosty both their Microsoft & Apple partnership now appears, it seems natural that OpenAI are tempted to pursue consumer devices, browsers (Operator is a start), IDEs (cf Windsurf).
cjbgkagh · 1d ago
Perhaps someone with a better memory can correct me, but wasn’t ios7 the first iPhone interface where Jony Ive had free range and it was really bad?
detourdog · 1d ago
That sounds about right. It was really bad. I don't know that it ever fully recovered.
dustbunny · 1d ago
This was the kind of video that would be appropriate as a retrospective on their career together after it's happened. Not appropriate before they've even done anything.
geor9e · 1d ago
They don't mention that Jony walks from Pac Heights, and instead of going directly to North Beach, he must have climbed to the top of Coit Tower's hill to access that particular staircase down to Jackson Square, then has to walk the long way around Telegraph Hill right past the cafe to climb uphill into Chinatown for another walking shot, then backtracks to the cafe. Another small irony is Jony was heading toward Lombard at the start, so if he walked a straight line to Coit, he would have walked right past Sam's driveway.
No comments yet
prepend · 1d ago
The Sam/Jony video reminds me of a friend who tells you how they are going on a diet. How much they spent on diet foods and supplements. And the details of all their exercise plans. And how great it will feel to be 50 pounds lighter.
It gives them the dopamine rush and adulation of the audience.
xt00 · 1d ago
The fact that Sam says he would open his laptop to ask Chatgpt something is almost like he is trying to avoid saying he would use his phone.
The reality is that we likely don't need any new devices as much as people want to keep saying that. If you have airpods and a phone you could talk to chatgpt and say "show me how to fix my kid's bike with a simple video on my phone" -- it buzzes your phone and boom the video is there. Sure it is missing the ability to take a picture of the world / video -- so in that case, a pair of the meta rayban glasses would do that -- again just use your phone / cloud, it all works. Or skip the special glasses and hold your phone up to the thing you want to take a picture of. No need for magical new devices.
Having a camera staring at me while I talk to somebody -- yea I'm gonna pass on that.
DaSHacka · 1d ago
> Having a camera staring at me while I talk to somebody -- yea I'm gonna pass on that.
My fear is this is a choice you or I can't make; it's up to the whims of others who may choose to use these products.
Time has shown again and again that average people don't exactly value their autonomy or privacy when technology's involved, I have no doubt it'd be the same way with literal live-streaming cameras attached to people's faces.
gyomu · 1d ago
The most disappointing thing about Jony as a designer is how nouveau-riche he is.
Since he left Apple, he’s been designing for Ferrari, King Charles, $2500 jackets, etc.
It feels quite at odds with Jobs’ original visions of products that were beautifully designed, but still remained generally affordable for students, teachers, small business owners, and Mr/Mrs Everybody in general.
Of all his tendencies that Jobs supposedly kept in check, I think that’s the most underdiscussed one. I guess the writing was on the wall with the $10k gold Apple Watch.
dfex · 1d ago
To be fair, these are the companies that pay for the level of industrial design that Ive produces, and after spending the latter part of his career at Apple knocking out revisions of existing products, probably made a nice change.
I think it's fair to say that most companies building products priced for Mr/Mrs Everybody don't spend a dime on design where there is already a market leader to copy inspiration, or outright steal from (see almost every phone made since 2007).
The Gold Watch was probably an opportunity to work on an interesting project with a new material.
ethbr1 · 1d ago
That's the celebrity excess that architecture and industrial design encourage.
It's a weird comingling of the field trying to pretend it's more important and cool than it is + rampant imposter syndrome in its superstars.
Ergo, they must pretend they're doing Very Important Work and are The Best in the World.
... meanwhile, it's fucking curves on corners. Throw a dart and pick one.
The real work is being done by unfamous, tirelessly toiling rank and file in both industries, quietly making the world a better place, bit by bit.
detourdog · 1d ago
I don't think design and architecture are inherently as you describe.
ethbr1 · 23h ago
When in the last 50 years of both fields have they not lauded celebrity practitioners with overinflated egos?
detourdog · 23h ago
David Kelley, Niels Diffrient
ethbr1 · 6h ago
$1000+ chairs aren't a great example of practical, ego-less design.
And academia is a cop-out.
detourdog · 1d ago
The thing that disappointed me the most regarding the Apple Watch was the innards couldn't be upgraded. The case and band I thought could be held on to like an heirloom. The digital stuff could have been designed as capsule.
roxolotl · 1d ago
I wish I understood how people are convinced by these sorts of displays. Assuming every word is 100% true I’d still never buy what’s being sold. Sam Altman acts like billion dollar used car salesman. Somehow many, most?, people find this compelling and convincing. I just find it repulsive.
And I appreciate that I am as easy to sell to if the thing I find trusting is being used. It just blows my mind that this is what seems to work the best.
prawn · 1d ago
It's a mystery and mysteries can be exciting. You can become invested in that without thinking you'd buy it. Have they hit on something? Is it probably underwhelming? But what if it's not. They have credibility. But do they?
I remember the Segway hype. A lot of it was intriguing because they had comments from heavyweights who in theory know how to assess a major product. But, yes, we know how that played out.
strangattractor · 1d ago
I think Altman needs a sidekick to help make him more likable. He suffers from resting Gloom face.
monkeyelite · 1d ago
I think that’s the plan - give open ai a better look and face.
gyomu · 1d ago
These people are 1) unbelievably rich, and 2) their name is everywhere (the latter being easy to achieve if you have the first).
For most people, that’s enough to inspire… something.
etrautmann · 1d ago
I’m not sure that’s true. It’s a lot easier to turn power into money that money into power.
globalnode · 1d ago
I suspect Altman is just using the shotgun approach to getting likes (from powerful people) and when he gets one he markets it as though it was pre-ordained.
ethbr1 · 1d ago
It's a proven approach -- worked for Theranos.
IncreasePosts · 1d ago
Sam Altman is compelling to people who think accumulating as much money as possible is the point of life
mmooss · 1d ago
Humans are social animals and follow social norms. One thing sophisticated communicators do is define the social norm and people follow them. It really doesn't matter what they say, but that they demonstrate that they are in control of the norm.
Notice that Trump often says nonsense, or says things everyone knows he can't be trusted about. But he demonstrates his power to control the social norms through his initiative, the emotional power of his rhetoric, his power overall. People perceive that the herd will follow him and go that way. Perception becomes reality.
With Altman and Ive, here are two powerful people demonstrating the same thing, to a different audience in a way appropriate to that audience. It doesn't matter what they say. The fact that it's obvious nonsense makes it more powerful - it shows they are so powerful that they can brazenly BS and still execute. Your comment shows that you believe the herd will follow them. Your perception becomes reality.
neilv · 1d ago
This piece is a long way to say that there is no useful information in the video.
The only useful information is that they decided to make this video.
The piece mostly engages in frivolous crit of unimportant execution details of the content-free video.
detourdog · 1d ago
I think the details are really important because it demonstrates the excess amount of money and effort that went into a video of 2 people talking.
Why fill the streets with extras?
I think the details revealed in the article demonstrates lack of focus and misguided priorities. There was no need for the video.
I get the feeling that Altman is aware that OpenAI has lost the race and has thus relegated to treating it like a pure grift until the wheels fall off.
csomar · 21h ago
TSLA market cap is currently $1Trillion. Clearly the grift can go for a long time.
senectus1 · 1d ago
ayup.
also, AI is a race to the bottom...
Businesses buy into AI so they can lay off staff -> more an more people have fewer jobs -> those jobless people can no longer afford to buy the goods that the AI replaced humans to do -> the businesses that invested in AI start losing money hand over fist -> (richest people buy into politics to corruptly ensure they stay rich, the unfairly repressed poor {and the young that never get a chance to build a career} rise up in violence) -> economic collapse. At some point AI is used to "control" the uprising.
In the end I suspect an almost complete rejection of capitalism. I dont know what will replace it. but this is all going to come to a horrible end
> 39. Any exploration program which "just happens" to include a new launch vehicle is, de facto, a launch vehicle program.
Having a Jony Ive project on the side isn't going to do squat for OpenAI—if they're going to go into consumer hardware that's going to need to be an all-consuming strategic pivot, which their other moves suggest they're not doing. They're currently in spaghetti at the wall mode with Jony Ive as just one bet among many, which is a very bad way to approach a new piece of consumer hardware that's meant to compete with Apple.
[0] https://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/akins_laws.html
You have to build a phone.
There is no other way to get the data you need to make XR glasses, AI pebble, Rabbit etc work the way people expect without it. Because Apple and Google are well within the rights to deny the siphoning of your private data to a company like OpenAI who only exists because of large scale trademark abuse.
That's where Samsung went all in on building it's own ecosystem.
I think there’s a lot of space for device innovation right now. A quick survey of sci-fi ideas yields a lot of possibilities:
Lapel pins that talk to you
Earrings / Earcuffs that talk to you
Directed environmental audio that only you can hear
Drones that attach to you, fly around when you or they want, and then .. talk to you
Projection on arbitrary surfaces
Smart surfaces everywhere that show things
Anyway. We’re not done innovating data and compute connectivity in device form in my opinion. And, I think we would both do well to remember that how hard it is to sell me, or you, on a new phone, is massively different if you’re willing to give away your first 100mm phones.
That said I’m not convinced the next thing they’re putting out is a phone. But it might be a phone killer, or a baby thing that will one day be a phone killer.
That infrastructure and brand is extremely difficult to bootstrap.
The only way new bespoke hardware will ever work is if its the only way to get access to their AGI agent or something.
I believe the preferred terminology is "drone collar"
Reminds me of this:
https://x.com/sama/status/1791183356274921568
Funny his shoes in the Jony Ive video share a similar aesthetic to the very Google stage he was calling out. It gets better when you consider Google's only recently begun starting to kick OpenAI's ass, and all without fake-ass coffee shop extras.
The lengths people go to try to appear "real" never ceases to amuse. Surely there's a formal term for this? Perhaps the Zuckerberg effect.
"Disappointed it doesn’t simulate the experience of stepping on a lego brick by accident"
I'm so far out of touch I have never heard of the Lego Adidas shoe partnership.
ms.inopinatus sure has some kink.
> We have more than five minutes left. Spoiler alert: That’s the only detail about the device that’s in the entire video. —KT
There's a lot of hype building going on for very little detail. Similar feeling to the Humane teaser videos from a year or two before they launched.
But also, you don't go to all the effort of preparing glasses that are 10 years ahead of the industry and wearing them in a video... only to not have a big reveal. There has to be a pay off to the marketing, and saying "one more thing, we were wearing these last year" in their product announcement doesn't get them anything.
this has been what most attempts at new tech have been for like a decade... a smartphone on your wrist, a smartphone strapped to your face, tv that's a shitty smartphone, a lapel pin smartphone...
I have been naming my iPhones since 5 or 6 soap because they are like holding a wet bar of soap. I’m not expecting earth shattering product.
I think Ives real talent is in materials and fabrication.
Huh. Do you have a reference for this? If this is in a book or something I'm interested to read more about this backstory.
> Kamen showed it to Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos and John Doerr. Bezos reportedly made his "loud, honking laugh" of appreciation. Jobs said it would cause people to re-architect cities and compared its importance to the PC. Doerr likened IT in magnitude to the Internet and then invested in it.
But there were zero public details about what "IT" was. (IT was the Segway.)
https://www.forbes.com/2001/01/18/0118malone.html
Speaking of Steve Jobs, I think the reason the "sam and jony" page looks like a wedding announcement crossed with an Apple advertising -- down to the url https://openai.com/sam-and-jony (which you should visit if the only thing youve seen is the 'how we met' video TFA is breaking down) -- is because it's trying to frame Sam as Jony's new Steve Jobs.
In segways case, not only was it a little underwhelming compared to the buzz, GW Bush flipped headfirst over it during a demo drive. I imagine that had some moderating impact on launch.
The speculation about Altman & Ive's new product rhymes perfectly, so it's fair to expect just as great a disappointment when they finally unveil the reality.
Their first mover advantage is gone, they are unable to innovate on their core product and everything that is said or done is hyped to the extreme.
And now trying to move into adjacent categories where there is no clear problem to be solved and is putting them up against the biggest players in the industry.
Smartphones/PCs/wearables, browsers, social media, & IDEs are absolutely important to any company wanting to sell increasingly more capable models that understand our world better with each passing year (provided the scale hypothesis keeps up): For the control over both the hardware and the OS, and for the amount of data that can be fed back to the training set.
Google (and to varying extents Microsoft & Meta) can leverage their existing products or distribution advantages. Given the how frosty both their Microsoft & Apple partnership now appears, it seems natural that OpenAI are tempted to pursue consumer devices, browsers (Operator is a start), IDEs (cf Windsurf).
No comments yet
It gives them the dopamine rush and adulation of the audience.
The reality is that we likely don't need any new devices as much as people want to keep saying that. If you have airpods and a phone you could talk to chatgpt and say "show me how to fix my kid's bike with a simple video on my phone" -- it buzzes your phone and boom the video is there. Sure it is missing the ability to take a picture of the world / video -- so in that case, a pair of the meta rayban glasses would do that -- again just use your phone / cloud, it all works. Or skip the special glasses and hold your phone up to the thing you want to take a picture of. No need for magical new devices.
Having a camera staring at me while I talk to somebody -- yea I'm gonna pass on that.
My fear is this is a choice you or I can't make; it's up to the whims of others who may choose to use these products.
Time has shown again and again that average people don't exactly value their autonomy or privacy when technology's involved, I have no doubt it'd be the same way with literal live-streaming cameras attached to people's faces.
Since he left Apple, he’s been designing for Ferrari, King Charles, $2500 jackets, etc.
It feels quite at odds with Jobs’ original visions of products that were beautifully designed, but still remained generally affordable for students, teachers, small business owners, and Mr/Mrs Everybody in general.
Of all his tendencies that Jobs supposedly kept in check, I think that’s the most underdiscussed one. I guess the writing was on the wall with the $10k gold Apple Watch.
I think it's fair to say that most companies building products priced for Mr/Mrs Everybody don't spend a dime on design where there is already a market leader to copy inspiration, or outright steal from (see almost every phone made since 2007).
The Gold Watch was probably an opportunity to work on an interesting project with a new material.
It's a weird comingling of the field trying to pretend it's more important and cool than it is + rampant imposter syndrome in its superstars.
Ergo, they must pretend they're doing Very Important Work and are The Best in the World.
... meanwhile, it's fucking curves on corners. Throw a dart and pick one.
The real work is being done by unfamous, tirelessly toiling rank and file in both industries, quietly making the world a better place, bit by bit.
And academia is a cop-out.
And I appreciate that I am as easy to sell to if the thing I find trusting is being used. It just blows my mind that this is what seems to work the best.
I remember the Segway hype. A lot of it was intriguing because they had comments from heavyweights who in theory know how to assess a major product. But, yes, we know how that played out.
For most people, that’s enough to inspire… something.
Notice that Trump often says nonsense, or says things everyone knows he can't be trusted about. But he demonstrates his power to control the social norms through his initiative, the emotional power of his rhetoric, his power overall. People perceive that the herd will follow him and go that way. Perception becomes reality.
With Altman and Ive, here are two powerful people demonstrating the same thing, to a different audience in a way appropriate to that audience. It doesn't matter what they say. The fact that it's obvious nonsense makes it more powerful - it shows they are so powerful that they can brazenly BS and still execute. Your comment shows that you believe the herd will follow them. Your perception becomes reality.
The only useful information is that they decided to make this video.
The piece mostly engages in frivolous crit of unimportant execution details of the content-free video.
Why fill the streets with extras?
I think the details revealed in the article demonstrates lack of focus and misguided priorities. There was no need for the video.
OpenAI to buy AI startup from Jony Ive
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44053518
also, AI is a race to the bottom...
Businesses buy into AI so they can lay off staff -> more an more people have fewer jobs -> those jobless people can no longer afford to buy the goods that the AI replaced humans to do -> the businesses that invested in AI start losing money hand over fist -> (richest people buy into politics to corruptly ensure they stay rich, the unfairly repressed poor {and the young that never get a chance to build a career} rise up in violence) -> economic collapse. At some point AI is used to "control" the uprising.
In the end I suspect an almost complete rejection of capitalism. I dont know what will replace it. but this is all going to come to a horrible end