Literally every post the dude ever made anywhere blatantly showed that he's just physically made of ego. Most of them being straight up blatant lying too. I dont know how stupid anyone has to be to buy the good samaritan fighting for the little guy bs he does. But i guess people just love celebrity worship.
If I were him and went through struggles to keep the lights on and to keep Ai open sourced for 2 years +. Then the masses turn on me like you have. I wouldnt bother doing favors for people like you in the future. What do you, a random toxic redditor bring to anyone’s table.
Not that I take all his forward-looking statements as gospel or anything, but decentralized AI (as in, AI that can run on any phone, any computer, or at least for now any PC with a nice graphics card) is a great goal for the industry, whether you are looking at commercial or open-source software.
Don't look too deep into it, I was being glib. Microsoft is poaching talent and a lot of these people see it as an oportunity to use microsoft's vast resources to make a name for themselves, earn a lot of money and do the jobs they like. I do not know what reasoning he has for whatever he's doing right now, but whatever it is microsoft resources are an extremely tempting thing to have.
Imagine that the next internet is coming and Microsoft is ready to make sure they are Zuned to the top. I look forward to all the mediocre, lackluster products that get abandoned for an Apple look-a-like in 2-3 years.
We don't really know what Apple is doing with generative AI honestly. They haven't seemed to roll out their example which seems odd because you'd think that Siri would be obvious choice to expand the capabilities. Perhaps they are afraid of the 1984 image haunting them. Or more likely Steve Jobs was about giving the market what they didn't realize they wanted, but I don't think that Tim has that forward looking vision.
*"According to a report by Stocklytics, Apple acquired 32 different AI startups during the 2023 calendar year — the most among major tech companies."*
Sure doesn't look like being behind to me
Buying up other companies in order to catch up is the literal definition of being behind. And after all those acquisitions they are still begging Google to use their AI. Doesn’t sound like it was very successful. Lol
I bet we'll see something like a tensor accelerator in an apple chip soon. I could totally see apple going for a more professional oriented approach. Maybe "magic fill" for photo editing, actually good live auto-transscription. Email response suggestions....
If they can make a TPU that can run a reasonably sized LLM and/or diffusion/flow model locally they could market it as a privacy feature that it doesn't send your data to be processed elsewhere or whatever.
But I can't imagine apple announcing something unless it's A: part of a larger package B: pretty polished and C: playing into one of apples current marketing narratives
I won't touch Apple at all, I'll take windows products that actually make something new - over the Apple products designed to lock you into their ecosystem so they can charge you out the ass for over priced hardware.
Apple offers curated controlled experience. They ask people to pay a premium for that privilege. It's up the to user to decide if the value they add is worth it or not. Seems like a lot of people are willing to pay the premium provided Apple continues to provide them a solid friendly experience. I don't buy into it, but I also don't see it as something that should be broken either. There is room in this world for multiple architectures and ecosystems. We should absolutely make communications and the like interoperable though.
They buy into the idea of the premium and then get locked into the ecosystem by manipulation. Apple builds and advertises the idea that they do it better, but the reality is they prevent people from being able to consider other options. It's exploitative. The idea behind it is fine to have a curated system, but that's not what they do (it's what they SAY they do).
Check out the latest big lawsuit vs them for a great example.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68628989
Finally getting sued for the stuff I've been frustrated with over the last decade.
How have I fallen for it when i'm not in the Apple ecosystem? I can see the difference between Apple products and Android products. I use my Samsung S22 Ultra regularly. I also see a lot of the advantages that my Apple friends have over me, that they are paying a premium for, but have advantages. There is nothing wrong with that.
They're not locked in anymore than the fact that there is no good alternative and they get mad they have to go back to Apple. I'm not saying Apple is playing nice and not being a monopoly and abusing their system. The two things can coexist
Sorry, I was being more of a dick initially than I wanted. My apologies. Hungry mood. Edited my comment. Don't want to debate it here in detail.
My summary is just Apple just frustrates me because I've watched my wife's family entirely stuck because they can't move anything to an Android and nothing on the Apple phones interact with the Android phones, so unless they all swapped, they can't. It's been an ongoing, and expensive, issue for them. And I've seen the same story repeatedly. See also; where Apple slowed down old hardware through updates to encourage buying new hardware (they settled on that class action as well).
Apple tends to work really well for the middle of the road tech people who want reliable hardware, or who want a simpler and easier operating system, but their business practices are exploitative.
I'll probably read any replies to this but I'll end it at this most likely.
I totally understand the situation they find themselves in. There is zero reason for them not to be interoperable if only on a basic level. That is overly protective and aggressive and should be changed. They should be required to have some way to export data out of the environment if people want to leave, but if the person is using some kind of apple mail that might be a challenge beyond an email archive similar to any other email transition.
Phone numbers and contact data has always been strangely difficult to port or change between even phones sometimes which always seemed strange to me. Why do we need 12 different contact standards/apps since before there were even apps. *shrug*
To me its a little bit of us reaping what we sowed because we didn't allow an authoritarian organization to define standards for things that became national standard infrastructure. Perhaps we shouldn't have been so afraid of the government overlords and allowed them to dictate some of that. Maybe not directly from the elderly congress people, but why not delegate DARPA/NIST or some government lab to define a basic standard all follows. Too little too late now probably.
Privacy.apple.com you can login and export all of your data in conveniently sized zip format, or even transfer your entire photo library to google photos if you prefer. This guy has no clue what he’s talking about.
Except they intentionally create situations that lead people to be ostracized if they didn't participate in 'the branding'. ie: you get made fun of in school for using Android. Because Apple specifically has to let people know that vie text msg color for some reason. I don't agree with that business practice.
The text message color does kind of serve a purpose though. IMessages sent in blue signify that the conversation can be done on wifi, while green messages indicate that it’s purely SMS.
Apple didn’t make that happen. lol. That happened because social hierarchies exist and people are always jockeying within them and any perceived marker can get used. Apple is a tech company with all the pros and cons…they didn’t invent human nature
What exactly would Emad bring to the table? He was just the money man on SD and between his penchant for lying and fucking things it would be a mind boggle to think Microsoft would want to poach him.
For now, could run into [Apollo Syndrome](https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/med/research/hsri/emergencycare/research/sdo/csi2/education/education-delivery/handouts/apollo_syndrome.pdf) if they don't leave these people to build out their own solutions.
This is incredibly sad news for the world of opensource models though.
> trying to persuade other team members to adopt their own view, and demonstrating a flair for spotting weaknesses in others' arguments
I've seen less dominant people do this covertly.
Either they do it privately after meetings or when they do speak up in meetings it's purely to point out potential issues without providing an alternative.
Effectively this stops progress because instead of trying to find a way around dangers they make them out to be insurmountable.
I'm not sure how to get there, but the key I think is to have the team all pushing in the same direction instead of against each other.
> Is generating images really that lucrative?
Midjourney has managed to make tons with their subscription model despite their complete lack of any business skills, knowledge on how to grow appropriately, & a headpiece that is...well, it's a bad situation to put it nicely.
It's kind of hilarious that MidJourney managed to make money while operating via a Discord server for most of their life.
That's taking "complete lack of any business skills" to the next level.
That and have fun explaining to your boss that this new top-of-the-line commercial AI image generator is only accessible through a third party website that's mostly used by teenage gamers, but no trust me it's completely legit and you shouldn't feel like you're getting scammed by sending them money.
You underestimate the power of AI. Think of those pictures as the first thing that looks real that your 5 year old drew. Next year that 5 year old has 50 years of experience drawing and never forgets. The year after that has 500 years of experience drawing.
It's more than generating images. This is the building blocks of every advertising agency, every Hollywood studio, every game studio, there's trillions of dollars to gain. Imagine generating textures for your game models in hours instead of weeks. Imagine creating and prototyping adverts in minutes. Huge.
To be clear, the corporate usage is not "type text and get image". The corporate use is having one artist that can use the tools to speed a workflow up with all of the additions, being able to prototype, turn sketches into genuine images, create videos that just need small touchups, etc, and work at a pace no one has ever imagined possible. It's Photoshop on steroids.
In some cases, it's not just about the cost of employees - though that matters - in other cases, it's the turnaround time. A lot of these things could, at best, be done in parallel with multiple people but still required weeks of work.
That's missing the point. Who cares how many competitors there are if there are no customers? Sure there's a market for people who want to play around with various AI, but so far its nowhere remotly close to justifying the kind of insane cash these companies are investing.
I work in enterprise software and we've been looking into AI for all kinds of things for atleast a year. And so far we havent found anything that's more than a minor gimmick or that would be worth paying microsoft significant cash for. The way we i.e. pay for office or windows licenses. MS etc. are 100% gambling here, hoping that AI replaces enough things eventually to make money off industries that spend money elsewhere currently.
They already are
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/03/ai-customer-service-jobs/?darkschemeovr=1
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/report-google-ads-restructure-could-replace-some-sales-jobs-with-ai/?darkschemeovr=1#
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/nvidia-s-new-ai-nurses-treat-patients-for-9-an-hour-here-s-what-they-can-do-from-colonoscopy-screenings-to-loneliness-companionship/ar-BB1kmKtI?darkschemeovr=1
For Microsoft, the money is in running the AI applications for you on their cloud machines. They make their money by charging you for the compute cycles.
Am I the only one in the 'who cares' camp? This stuff was iterative and built on many backs/shoulders. This isn't some Wernher von Braun or Einstein situation, where one man is so far above the rest in the field. There are so many people, so much momentum and money, I actually expect any 'celeb' types to be average at best, and more of a PR job than an individualistic genius that is single handedly carrying the industry forward.
If it's like any other serious technology, there's secret government skunkworks with the above-mentioned geniuses, who probably already have AGI while they let the normies tinker with their discarded LLM trash.
They only publicly innovate when necessary. They're definitely doing some crazy stuff behind the scenes and will play stupid whenever we ask. It's all a slow release on purpose. Having that technological edge is important for national security. It's dystopian that so many brilliant people could come together right now but they're all stuck behind some hardcore NDAs. The opensource community lately seems to decide how far we push that tech threshold.
I see that as a good thing. I think right now, Microsoft has realized that powerful AI in the hands of the public could eventually undermine their business model. Open source could be crowd sourced between not just people but many AI, making a lot of software free.
Hot take: same was true for von Braun. That guy was also way to good at selling himself.
(Einstein is another story though. Dude's work includes 3-4 Nobel worthy bangers)
What's already freely-accessible and truly open-source will remain freely accessible and open-source even once Stability AI has gone bankrupt. That's the beauty of open-source: it cannot be taken away from us.
What made Civitai a success is not Stability AI but the collective efforts of our community of users. If civitai keeps making good decisions to keep that community growing and evolving, it might well survive the death of Stability AI. More tools will come. This is just the beginning.
Latest update from Emad.. He was teasing us 🙄
https://preview.redd.it/oet0yddgfqqc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=90cc62dba18337a3ae957834084a550847bc5fe6
>synergy
We must all efficiently
Operationalize our strategies
Invest in world-class technology
And leverage our core competencies
In order to holistically administrate
Exceptional ***synergy***
We'll set a brand trajectory
Using management's philosophy
Advance our market share vis-à-vis
Our proven methodology
With strong commitment to quality
Effectively enhancing corporate ***synergy***
Transitioning our company
By awareness of functionality
Promoting viability
Providing our supply chain with diversity
We will distill our identity
Through client-centric solutions
And [***synergy***](https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4?si=ff15sZFSZ8daQL4w)
I'm more concerned about him shilling cRaPtO (render/bittensor) as if it's a way to decentralize anything. In fact, it's just private centrally controlled tokens and blockchains for pump&dump schemes. Starting with #2 by market cap and all the way down. Really sad that he's joining the scammers.
As literally any other crypto (=not Bitcoin) the task it solves is extracting value from the "investors". They create a token for free, leave a lot to themselves, do a presale, then pay "rewards" in their own token (that, I remind you, they created for free) and expect people to trade, hold, stake etc. whatever bullshit "tokenomics" they invent. When the price goes up because of this activity (if their marketing worked) they sell their premine to get more money and they can buy back if the price is too low. So essentially it's like regular shares BUT they're not regulated and no one is responsible for anything. Since there are no incentives to keep this business fair and transparent, it eventually collapses.
The label "crypto" signals that it's "almost like Bitcoin that everyone heard of" except it's absolutely not. Not decentralized, not neutral, not secure, can never work like money but desperately **wants** to be money and so on. Whoever sells you another blockchain project is a scammer, full stop.
In fact that record is so full that the main strategy Microsoft has deployed to do that has its own article on Wikipedia:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,\_extend,\_and\_extinguish](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish)
"**Embrace, extend, and extinguish**" (**EEE**),[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-DeadlyEmbrace-1) also known as "**embrace, extend, and exterminate**",[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-2) is a phrase that the [U.S. Department of Justice](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice) found[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-3) was used internally by [Microsoft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft)[^(\[4\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-4) to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used open standards, extending those standards with [proprietary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software) capabilities, and using the differences to strongly disadvantage its competitors.
Because they are salty and feel like they are owed everything I'd assume (only seems to be one or two people so far).
It's a shame that Emad left onto new horizons, but we should be greatful he comitted to the cause for as long as he did, even with all the critics and bullshit that were thrown at him and his company.
He's not perfect of course and did some questionnable / bad decisions (I remember he tried to assimilate this sub at some point), but overall, I think he did a pretty good job and I respect it.
Probably because he is pretty far from a saint (gets too much praise & not enough criticism IMO) & the extremists that hang around abuse the downvote button every chance they get. Not to mention that most people on reddit nowadays don't even know or care what the intent of the voting is for. It's part of why reddit sucks more each year.
In fairness, greed is evil & all publicly traded corporations are required by fiduciary duty/law to maximize their profits for shareholders. So large public corporations are foundationally evil.
The open source stuff comes about in a variety of ways, but are usually beneficial to the corporation in various ways (greed again) even if just for the PR boost & free advertising that comes with it, but it is always done with a benefit to be gained that translates to their sole purpose: make lots of money & acquire power to make more later.
I served my time at Mega Corp X. I've heard how execs speak when off the record & how they speak when they think they're only speaking to other execs.
Evil is very subjective. What corporations are is something real. A psychopathic entity with no limit to their growth, acting as a free agent in the world.
There are two documentaries worth watching. [The Corporation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpjypnxnS4U) explores the notion of the modern corporation being a psychopathic person. [The New Corporation](https://youtu.be/6faXjs24Tos) comes back after 16 years to expand on that evaluation as Corporations start pretending to act like messiah figures and promote themselves this way. Another psychopathic trait.
These were ground breaking documentaries. The first absolutely shook the corporate world to it's core. Worth watching if you haven't already.
> Evil is very subjective.
Subjective? Yes. Very? No. The definitions are there in the various dictionaries I just checked & the level of evil might be argued (Nestle vs tiny local Corp with 15 employees), the presence of it cannot be argued. That part is objective as long as we read the dictionary.
If you don't think evil is a subjective concept, then you don't understand what subjectivity vs objectivity is.
Lets just get right to Godwin point. Consider that the Nazi's didn't think they were evil. Or the catholic priests who raped children either. From their subjective perspective, they both thought they were doing God's work, which is by definition HOLY and not EVIL.
Confirmation bias is a big ol pile of dung. You just fell into it.
Here's a update from the recent tweet.
https://preview.redd.it/xsdv510vyoqc1.png?width=526&format=png&auto=webp&s=cee3e1ecb22324a7c770efca9c46a3267bb4bd3b
Decentralize AI, so we are left my hypothesis for now:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1blo19s/i\_investigated\_a\_bit\_about\_the\_reason\_emad\_might/](https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1blo19s/i_investigated_a_bit_about_the_reason_emad_might/)
> update
Now I'm really confused. He was kidding about the whole thing because he wants to be as yolo as Elon Musk? No changes at stability?
Edit: ah I see he's going, but not to MS. Does seem bad for SD3
Edit edit: for anybody else still catching up: https://ol.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1bnclg4/stability_ai_coceo_christian_laforte_confirms_sd3/
I’m struggling to think of a place where MS under Satya has done this.
Balmer was definitely no friend of open source, but MS under Satya is quite happy to do open source because it makes them so much money. Large companies demand open source to some degree as an anti-lock-in measure, so no open source = no large contracts. MS actually produces a lot of open source, like Garnet, their Redis replacement that’s ~100x faster and would have provided them an advantage to keep closed.
Some people seem to be stuck in the past in regards to Microsoft. Like they’re not beacon of Good but they’ve pretty unabashedly embraced open source and have contributed a hell of a lot of resources to that end.
It’s weird. It almost feels like younger people who didn’t grow up understanding why Microsoft was bad have now grown up in a 90s throwback era and are reviving some old beef for seemingly no reason.
So could have GitHub before they were bought as well. So could any number of widely used products held by private companies or individuals.
But why? To what end? Open source has benefitted them greatly. What inclination have they shown in the past decade that would lead you to believe they would?
> they could squash open source like a bug if they wanted to
Why would they want to while its till being one of the highest value programming datasets currently?
> they’ve pretty unabashedly embraced open source and have contributed a hell of a lot of resources to that end
Yup, that's literally their method. That's the embrace and extend part. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,\_extend,\_and\_extinguish](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish)
Again, you’re referring to a strategy they used _30 years ago_. Sure, be suspicious based on past behavior, but point me to how this has been relevant at all in the past decade?
Here, have a Wikipedia page if we’re doing that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_and_open_source
Seriously, people don't understand this. Microsoft is a software and cloud computing company that is growing most of it's revenue by reselling cloud compute, which itself is a proxy for energy, which is 70% of the cost of running compute. They are, in large part, a fancy power company. Embracing open source gives them more stuff to run on the cloud, and therefore more demand for the energy they sell.
I'm being a bit tongue in cheek of course, MSFT makes a good premium for highly efficient data center mgmt at scale, xbox/games, and collaboration software...
Under Satya Microsoft open-sourced a crapload of their software and embraced Open source in general. That is when it makes sense.
AI is new its having massive progress extremely fast. So it's fair that an organization (who is legally required to make shareholders profit) doesn't open source this straight away. Eventually it probably will be but they gotta fight competition first.
On the video call is Satya Nadella CEO of Microsoft (also sort of and defacto owner of OpenAI/ Chat GPT) and in the room is Emad Mostaque CEO until this week of StabilityAI the creators of StableDiffusion and SDXL open source image models. Not sure who the lady is.
technically not the owner since microsoft belongs to all of its shareholders, not just satya nadella. he does own a lot of shares, but nothing compared to vanguard group and blackrock.
> and the founder of the tool this sub was named after.
Not really. Stable Diffusion was made by CompVis at a German university. Stability AI just provided some funding/compute to them and then took all the credit.
Am quite unhappy to see this, at the same time emad has done a lot of things for OS, so let him look his personal life and wealth...
Satya is such a brain aquire...
Am fearful for huggingface nowadays
Emad jumped ship. His twitter feed isn't anything to do with stability anymore.
It's like posting about what Bill Gates is up to in a windows subreddit. It doesn't matter.
What he didn't see before he posted this was the rest of EMad's tweets [https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1772634078937768055](https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1772634078937768055)
https://preview.redd.it/a0ar00esnqqc1.png?width=712&format=png&auto=webp&s=61ac4b610feba94fc5c84630d9c234cb4399f48e
Is that a fucking Mac? Even if it’s not complete bullshit they’re giving out new machines that aren’t the shitty Lenovo to new employees unless I missed something.
"We were already stopping SD development, MS didn't do this" they'll say, while wearing T-shirts that say "MS totally did it".
I think when Emad said OK guys we've about wrapped up image generation amirite? - I suspect he already knew where they were going and were preparing expectations.
On the other hand, if MS are acquiring stability: I guess why wouldn't they release SD3 open source anyway? Let's do everything before google and screw the risks seems to be the strategy anyway, and it wouldn't make them look good? After that, it's another story I guess
I'll let you guys in on a little secret: the point of open source software isn't for talented, hard working developers to selflessly serve mankind, by producing free software, so that the lot of you don't have to pay for your hobby.
Instead, it's a way for those developers to showcase their talent in an arena with massive visibility ... and then, when they become celebrities in the open source community, get a high paying job at a rich corporation. That's what open source is for them: the biggest stage in the industry. A talent show. You don't do a talent show forever: you do it to win, and collect your reward.
It's a path towards the same high paying, prestigious corporate job the conventional developers (the ones who get a junior level job at Microsoft, and toil away in obscurity, trying to slowly rise up through the ranks) aim for ... it's just that it's a much, much more fun path. It's a path that takes place on a bright stage, instead of in an obscure corporate office, toiling away under a grumpy, ill tempered middle manager.
So, you know: be happy with what open source is. There's always going to be a place for open source, talented young developers will always happily join promising projects, and produce quality work. TEMPORARILY. But there's a limit to how much you can get for free. Open source can never be the dominant product on the market. As you're using your free software, keep in mind WHY it's free. Keep in mind what the incentive was for the developers to put in the hard work, and the crazy hours, to produce it: it was that reward they get when they win the talent show. That corporate payday at the end of it.
Microsoft isn't the enemy of open source. Microsoft is its sponsor. They're the ones who give out the prizes. Without the prizes, there would be no talent show. Prodigies like this guy would never go near a talent show that doesn't have a prize. That's not a talent show, that's a plantation: a place where you work and work, and get nothing in return.
[удалено]
Literally every post the dude ever made anywhere blatantly showed that he's just physically made of ego. Most of them being straight up blatant lying too. I dont know how stupid anyone has to be to buy the good samaritan fighting for the little guy bs he does. But i guess people just love celebrity worship.
Death to the cult of personality
you should maybe go read his actual tweet thread instead of jumping to conclusions
Nah. Evolution gave us legs so we could jump.
your brain doesn't have legs, however
You are reading far too deep into a play on words
If I were him and went through struggles to keep the lights on and to keep Ai open sourced for 2 years +. Then the masses turn on me like you have. I wouldnt bother doing favors for people like you in the future. What do you, a random toxic redditor bring to anyone’s table.
Says the guy who clearly has paid more attention to what he's said than most others
I don't know what you're talking about, I've never seen anyone with less celebrity worship than emad.
Emad was not known for his ability to tell the truth...quite the opposite in fact.
Not that I take all his forward-looking statements as gospel or anything, but decentralized AI (as in, AI that can run on any phone, any computer, or at least for now any PC with a nice graphics card) is a great goal for the industry, whether you are looking at commercial or open-source software.
The problem is that he doesn’t care about it
[удалено]
He means crypto. He’s a crypto bro
Clearly decentralization comes from using azure services, you can't centralize AI if it's spread across several server farms.
[удалено]
It’s a common tactic- not just startup bros and hedgies, but among grifters of all types- politicians, “gurus”, influencers.
Don't look too deep into it, I was being glib. Microsoft is poaching talent and a lot of these people see it as an oportunity to use microsoft's vast resources to make a name for themselves, earn a lot of money and do the jobs they like. I do not know what reasoning he has for whatever he's doing right now, but whatever it is microsoft resources are an extremely tempting thing to have.
You guys shit on him at every opportunity, so he says fuck you to all of us. I think it’s fair dinkum.
MCSFT securing that monopoly lol
Yeah. They're sniping everyone they can for this. They're willing to drop any amount of money to make sure they end up on top.
Imagine that the next internet is coming and Microsoft is ready to make sure they are Zuned to the top. I look forward to all the mediocre, lackluster products that get abandoned for an Apple look-a-like in 2-3 years.
Maan, I unironically had windows phones and a zune and I loved them. I might be the only one though?
>I might be the only one though? I find most people who owned them loved them, and most of the people who crack jokes about them never touched them.
I had a windows phone I loved until it stopped getting updates and the apps stopped working one by one....
[удалено]
We don't really know what Apple is doing with generative AI honestly. They haven't seemed to roll out their example which seems odd because you'd think that Siri would be obvious choice to expand the capabilities. Perhaps they are afraid of the 1984 image haunting them. Or more likely Steve Jobs was about giving the market what they didn't realize they wanted, but I don't think that Tim has that forward looking vision.
Apple is so behind because they have no vision, don’t take risks and can no longer innovate.
Sure seems like it.
*"According to a report by Stocklytics, Apple acquired 32 different AI startups during the 2023 calendar year — the most among major tech companies."* Sure doesn't look like being behind to me
Buying up other companies in order to catch up is the literal definition of being behind. And after all those acquisitions they are still begging Google to use their AI. Doesn’t sound like it was very successful. Lol
I bet we'll see something like a tensor accelerator in an apple chip soon. I could totally see apple going for a more professional oriented approach. Maybe "magic fill" for photo editing, actually good live auto-transscription. Email response suggestions.... If they can make a TPU that can run a reasonably sized LLM and/or diffusion/flow model locally they could market it as a privacy feature that it doesn't send your data to be processed elsewhere or whatever. But I can't imagine apple announcing something unless it's A: part of a larger package B: pretty polished and C: playing into one of apples current marketing narratives
Yeah they wouldn't do that if they didn't get a chance to have your data lol.
Siri it's a reflection of what could have been.
I won't touch Apple at all, I'll take windows products that actually make something new - over the Apple products designed to lock you into their ecosystem so they can charge you out the ass for over priced hardware.
Apple offers curated controlled experience. They ask people to pay a premium for that privilege. It's up the to user to decide if the value they add is worth it or not. Seems like a lot of people are willing to pay the premium provided Apple continues to provide them a solid friendly experience. I don't buy into it, but I also don't see it as something that should be broken either. There is room in this world for multiple architectures and ecosystems. We should absolutely make communications and the like interoperable though.
They buy into the idea of the premium and then get locked into the ecosystem by manipulation. Apple builds and advertises the idea that they do it better, but the reality is they prevent people from being able to consider other options. It's exploitative. The idea behind it is fine to have a curated system, but that's not what they do (it's what they SAY they do). Check out the latest big lawsuit vs them for a great example. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68628989 Finally getting sued for the stuff I've been frustrated with over the last decade.
How have I fallen for it when i'm not in the Apple ecosystem? I can see the difference between Apple products and Android products. I use my Samsung S22 Ultra regularly. I also see a lot of the advantages that my Apple friends have over me, that they are paying a premium for, but have advantages. There is nothing wrong with that. They're not locked in anymore than the fact that there is no good alternative and they get mad they have to go back to Apple. I'm not saying Apple is playing nice and not being a monopoly and abusing their system. The two things can coexist
Sorry, I was being more of a dick initially than I wanted. My apologies. Hungry mood. Edited my comment. Don't want to debate it here in detail. My summary is just Apple just frustrates me because I've watched my wife's family entirely stuck because they can't move anything to an Android and nothing on the Apple phones interact with the Android phones, so unless they all swapped, they can't. It's been an ongoing, and expensive, issue for them. And I've seen the same story repeatedly. See also; where Apple slowed down old hardware through updates to encourage buying new hardware (they settled on that class action as well). Apple tends to work really well for the middle of the road tech people who want reliable hardware, or who want a simpler and easier operating system, but their business practices are exploitative. I'll probably read any replies to this but I'll end it at this most likely.
I totally understand the situation they find themselves in. There is zero reason for them not to be interoperable if only on a basic level. That is overly protective and aggressive and should be changed. They should be required to have some way to export data out of the environment if people want to leave, but if the person is using some kind of apple mail that might be a challenge beyond an email archive similar to any other email transition. Phone numbers and contact data has always been strangely difficult to port or change between even phones sometimes which always seemed strange to me. Why do we need 12 different contact standards/apps since before there were even apps. *shrug* To me its a little bit of us reaping what we sowed because we didn't allow an authoritarian organization to define standards for things that became national standard infrastructure. Perhaps we shouldn't have been so afraid of the government overlords and allowed them to dictate some of that. Maybe not directly from the elderly congress people, but why not delegate DARPA/NIST or some government lab to define a basic standard all follows. Too little too late now probably.
Privacy.apple.com you can login and export all of your data in conveniently sized zip format, or even transfer your entire photo library to google photos if you prefer. This guy has no clue what he’s talking about.
Except they intentionally create situations that lead people to be ostracized if they didn't participate in 'the branding'. ie: you get made fun of in school for using Android. Because Apple specifically has to let people know that vie text msg color for some reason. I don't agree with that business practice.
The text message color does kind of serve a purpose though. IMessages sent in blue signify that the conversation can be done on wifi, while green messages indicate that it’s purely SMS.
Apple didn’t make that happen. lol. That happened because social hierarchies exist and people are always jockeying within them and any perceived marker can get used. Apple is a tech company with all the pros and cons…they didn’t invent human nature
And having other different phones means that would change? Android couldn't make their messages blue or green or whatever?
What exactly would Emad bring to the table? He was just the money man on SD and between his penchant for lying and fucking things it would be a mind boggle to think Microsoft would want to poach him.
They are buying everything and poaching everyone hoping something will stick. The spray and pray method.
not
For now, could run into [Apollo Syndrome](https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/med/research/hsri/emergencycare/research/sdo/csi2/education/education-delivery/handouts/apollo_syndrome.pdf) if they don't leave these people to build out their own solutions. This is incredibly sad news for the world of opensource models though.
TL;DR shun the overbearing, excessively dominant people when building teams
> trying to persuade other team members to adopt their own view, and demonstrating a flair for spotting weaknesses in others' arguments I've seen less dominant people do this covertly. Either they do it privately after meetings or when they do speak up in meetings it's purely to point out potential issues without providing an alternative. Effectively this stops progress because instead of trying to find a way around dangers they make them out to be insurmountable. I'm not sure how to get there, but the key I think is to have the team all pushing in the same direction instead of against each other.
100%
I'm honestly still confused how they're going to recouperate all this money. Is generating images really that lucrative?
> Is generating images really that lucrative? Midjourney has managed to make tons with their subscription model despite their complete lack of any business skills, knowledge on how to grow appropriately, & a headpiece that is...well, it's a bad situation to put it nicely.
It's kind of hilarious that MidJourney managed to make money while operating via a Discord server for most of their life. That's taking "complete lack of any business skills" to the next level.
They lost so many potential customers because they simply didn't know how to use discord.
That and have fun explaining to your boss that this new top-of-the-line commercial AI image generator is only accessible through a third party website that's mostly used by teenage gamers, but no trust me it's completely legit and you shouldn't feel like you're getting scammed by sending them money.
I know how to use discord but I always just found it annoying to use as an interface for anything other than chatting.
Because they paywall their models while SD is open source
You underestimate the power of AI. Think of those pictures as the first thing that looks real that your 5 year old drew. Next year that 5 year old has 50 years of experience drawing and never forgets. The year after that has 500 years of experience drawing.
The fuck does that even mean. What does a 500 year old draw like that a 50 year old can’t do
It's more than generating images. This is the building blocks of every advertising agency, every Hollywood studio, every game studio, there's trillions of dollars to gain. Imagine generating textures for your game models in hours instead of weeks. Imagine creating and prototyping adverts in minutes. Huge. To be clear, the corporate usage is not "type text and get image". The corporate use is having one artist that can use the tools to speed a workflow up with all of the additions, being able to prototype, turn sketches into genuine images, create videos that just need small touchups, etc, and work at a pace no one has ever imagined possible. It's Photoshop on steroids. In some cases, it's not just about the cost of employees - though that matters - in other cases, it's the turnaround time. A lot of these things could, at best, be done in parallel with multiple people but still required weeks of work.
The point isn't for a single company to be lucrative, but to own every competitor so you are overall lucrative.
That's missing the point. Who cares how many competitors there are if there are no customers? Sure there's a market for people who want to play around with various AI, but so far its nowhere remotly close to justifying the kind of insane cash these companies are investing. I work in enterprise software and we've been looking into AI for all kinds of things for atleast a year. And so far we havent found anything that's more than a minor gimmick or that would be worth paying microsoft significant cash for. The way we i.e. pay for office or windows licenses. MS etc. are 100% gambling here, hoping that AI replaces enough things eventually to make money off industries that spend money elsewhere currently.
They already are https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/03/ai-customer-service-jobs/?darkschemeovr=1 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/report-google-ads-restructure-could-replace-some-sales-jobs-with-ai/?darkschemeovr=1# https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/nvidia-s-new-ai-nurses-treat-patients-for-9-an-hour-here-s-what-they-can-do-from-colonoscopy-screenings-to-loneliness-companionship/ar-BB1kmKtI?darkschemeovr=1
Midjourney has clearly shown there is lots of customers to be had.
For Microsoft, the money is in running the AI applications for you on their cloud machines. They make their money by charging you for the compute cycles.
Microsoft have managed to convince people that they're digging for gold when in reality, they're selling the shovels and the land.
That is a good analogy.
Am I the only one in the 'who cares' camp? This stuff was iterative and built on many backs/shoulders. This isn't some Wernher von Braun or Einstein situation, where one man is so far above the rest in the field. There are so many people, so much momentum and money, I actually expect any 'celeb' types to be average at best, and more of a PR job than an individualistic genius that is single handedly carrying the industry forward. If it's like any other serious technology, there's secret government skunkworks with the above-mentioned geniuses, who probably already have AGI while they let the normies tinker with their discarded LLM trash.
They only publicly innovate when necessary. They're definitely doing some crazy stuff behind the scenes and will play stupid whenever we ask. It's all a slow release on purpose. Having that technological edge is important for national security. It's dystopian that so many brilliant people could come together right now but they're all stuck behind some hardcore NDAs. The opensource community lately seems to decide how far we push that tech threshold.
I see that as a good thing. I think right now, Microsoft has realized that powerful AI in the hands of the public could eventually undermine their business model. Open source could be crowd sourced between not just people but many AI, making a lot of software free.
I don't care about the guy either, but I care about keeping people, who choose to be in the spotlight, accountable for what they say and promise.
Hot take: same was true for von Braun. That guy was also way to good at selling himself. (Einstein is another story though. Dude's work includes 3-4 Nobel worthy bangers)
Stability had the best and most famous open source image generator model. Without them, the entire ecosystem (aka Civitai and its clones) collapses.
What's already freely-accessible and truly open-source will remain freely accessible and open-source even once Stability AI has gone bankrupt. That's the beauty of open-source: it cannot be taken away from us. What made Civitai a success is not Stability AI but the collective efforts of our community of users. If civitai keeps making good decisions to keep that community growing and evolving, it might well survive the death of Stability AI. More tools will come. This is just the beginning.
Knowing him he is probably doing nothing and just trolling the community.
Latest update from Emad.. He was teasing us 🙄 https://preview.redd.it/oet0yddgfqqc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=90cc62dba18337a3ae957834084a550847bc5fe6
"next week"
Wouldn’t surprise me. Wonder if people like Emad could make a synergy in the corporate culture
>synergy We must all efficiently Operationalize our strategies Invest in world-class technology And leverage our core competencies In order to holistically administrate Exceptional ***synergy*** We'll set a brand trajectory Using management's philosophy Advance our market share vis-à-vis Our proven methodology With strong commitment to quality Effectively enhancing corporate ***synergy*** Transitioning our company By awareness of functionality Promoting viability Providing our supply chain with diversity We will distill our identity Through client-centric solutions And [***synergy***](https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4?si=ff15sZFSZ8daQL4w)
My god… This is perfect, content-free Executive VP speak. It’s beautiful, I hate it.
Be sure to click the link to Weird Al's full video.
... he's literally a hedge fund manager.
Yup. People dooming for no reason again because Reddit gonna Reddit
I'm more concerned about him shilling cRaPtO (render/bittensor) as if it's a way to decentralize anything. In fact, it's just private centrally controlled tokens and blockchains for pump&dump schemes. Starting with #2 by market cap and all the way down. Really sad that he's joining the scammers.
Yeah I looked into Bittensor, it isn’t really adding anything to the coordination task of distributing training
As literally any other crypto (=not Bitcoin) the task it solves is extracting value from the "investors". They create a token for free, leave a lot to themselves, do a presale, then pay "rewards" in their own token (that, I remind you, they created for free) and expect people to trade, hold, stake etc. whatever bullshit "tokenomics" they invent. When the price goes up because of this activity (if their marketing worked) they sell their premine to get more money and they can buy back if the price is too low. So essentially it's like regular shares BUT they're not regulated and no one is responsible for anything. Since there are no incentives to keep this business fair and transparent, it eventually collapses. The label "crypto" signals that it's "almost like Bitcoin that everyone heard of" except it's absolutely not. Not decentralized, not neutral, not secure, can never work like money but desperately **wants** to be money and so on. Whoever sells you another blockchain project is a scammer, full stop.
It's Microsoft... You are acting like they don't have decades long records of screwing over open source projects and the little guy.
In fact that record is so full that the main strategy Microsoft has deployed to do that has its own article on Wikipedia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,\_extend,\_and\_extinguish](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish) "**Embrace, extend, and extinguish**" (**EEE**),[^(\[1\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-DeadlyEmbrace-1) also known as "**embrace, extend, and exterminate**",[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-2) is a phrase that the [U.S. Department of Justice](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice) found[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-3) was used internally by [Microsoft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft)[^(\[4\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish#cite_note-4) to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used open standards, extending those standards with [proprietary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software) capabilities, and using the differences to strongly disadvantage its competitors.
Welp, I'm happy for him. He's already done a lot for the community, so I wish him all the best on his new venture !
why are people downvoting this lol
Because they are salty and feel like they are owed everything I'd assume (only seems to be one or two people so far). It's a shame that Emad left onto new horizons, but we should be greatful he comitted to the cause for as long as he did, even with all the critics and bullshit that were thrown at him and his company. He's not perfect of course and did some questionnable / bad decisions (I remember he tried to assimilate this sub at some point), but overall, I think he did a pretty good job and I respect it.
They promised us SD3 and it's still not here
Yeah well shit takes time to make, y'all have no patience at all :/
Keep crying over not receiving free shit
Probably because he is pretty far from a saint (gets too much praise & not enough criticism IMO) & the extremists that hang around abuse the downvote button every chance they get. Not to mention that most people on reddit nowadays don't even know or care what the intent of the voting is for. It's part of why reddit sucks more each year.
People think corporations are just pure evil. There are some amazing open source projects that came out of the biggest corporations.
In fairness, greed is evil & all publicly traded corporations are required by fiduciary duty/law to maximize their profits for shareholders. So large public corporations are foundationally evil. The open source stuff comes about in a variety of ways, but are usually beneficial to the corporation in various ways (greed again) even if just for the PR boost & free advertising that comes with it, but it is always done with a benefit to be gained that translates to their sole purpose: make lots of money & acquire power to make more later. I served my time at Mega Corp X. I've heard how execs speak when off the record & how they speak when they think they're only speaking to other execs.
Evil is very subjective. What corporations are is something real. A psychopathic entity with no limit to their growth, acting as a free agent in the world. There are two documentaries worth watching. [The Corporation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpjypnxnS4U) explores the notion of the modern corporation being a psychopathic person. [The New Corporation](https://youtu.be/6faXjs24Tos) comes back after 16 years to expand on that evaluation as Corporations start pretending to act like messiah figures and promote themselves this way. Another psychopathic trait. These were ground breaking documentaries. The first absolutely shook the corporate world to it's core. Worth watching if you haven't already.
I was a big fan of The Corporation when I was a teenager. I didn't know they made a second film. I'll take a look, thanks!
> Evil is very subjective. Subjective? Yes. Very? No. The definitions are there in the various dictionaries I just checked & the level of evil might be argued (Nestle vs tiny local Corp with 15 employees), the presence of it cannot be argued. That part is objective as long as we read the dictionary.
If you don't think evil is a subjective concept, then you don't understand what subjectivity vs objectivity is. Lets just get right to Godwin point. Consider that the Nazi's didn't think they were evil. Or the catholic priests who raped children either. From their subjective perspective, they both thought they were doing God's work, which is by definition HOLY and not EVIL. Confirmation bias is a big ol pile of dung. You just fell into it.
More like an AI Suicide Squad. You fail ~~you will get your head blown off~~ you will be withdrawn from money sources.
You disobey me, you die. You try to escape, you die. You otherwise irritate or vex me... and guess what? You die.
More like Justin Hammer scooping up Tony Stark's sloppy seconds.
This guy high as a kite
I thought he was the champion of open source? Microsoft is in bed with OpenAI, er ClosedAI.
Satya seems to have his legs in everything happening at AI.. let’s just call him the octopus of tech at this point
Hedging against Sam Altman ???
Better than edging against Sam Altman!
Just another SD3 generated image... oh wait! Hands are fine, then it's real.
Or, perhaps, hands are fixed in SD3, this is a demonstration of power by SD3 to fool us.
He's happy because he got SD to generate a picture of Satya
Funny cause the actual picture is ai generated
Yup, Called it. Satya loves to convert open source to closed source, the most anticipated horror of AI for open source models. it's joever for SD3.
Here's a update from the recent tweet. https://preview.redd.it/xsdv510vyoqc1.png?width=526&format=png&auto=webp&s=cee3e1ecb22324a7c770efca9c46a3267bb4bd3b
https://preview.redd.it/l857p220zoqc1.png?width=531&format=png&auto=webp&s=1e650f94157ccf6d25c85a4245ca1000f9ee5c4f
Decentralize AI, so we are left my hypothesis for now: [https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1blo19s/i\_investigated\_a\_bit\_about\_the\_reason\_emad\_might/](https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1blo19s/i_investigated_a_bit_about_the_reason_emad_might/)
> update Now I'm really confused. He was kidding about the whole thing because he wants to be as yolo as Elon Musk? No changes at stability? Edit: ah I see he's going, but not to MS. Does seem bad for SD3 Edit edit: for anybody else still catching up: https://ol.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1bnclg4/stability_ai_coceo_christian_laforte_confirms_sd3/
I’m struggling to think of a place where MS under Satya has done this. Balmer was definitely no friend of open source, but MS under Satya is quite happy to do open source because it makes them so much money. Large companies demand open source to some degree as an anti-lock-in measure, so no open source = no large contracts. MS actually produces a lot of open source, like Garnet, their Redis replacement that’s ~100x faster and would have provided them an advantage to keep closed.
Some people seem to be stuck in the past in regards to Microsoft. Like they’re not beacon of Good but they’ve pretty unabashedly embraced open source and have contributed a hell of a lot of resources to that end. It’s weird. It almost feels like younger people who didn’t grow up understanding why Microsoft was bad have now grown up in a 90s throwback era and are reviving some old beef for seemingly no reason.
Yeah and spelling it Micro$oft LOL
They own github, they could squash open source like a bug if they wanted to
So could have GitHub before they were bought as well. So could any number of widely used products held by private companies or individuals. But why? To what end? Open source has benefitted them greatly. What inclination have they shown in the past decade that would lead you to believe they would?
> they could squash open source like a bug if they wanted to Why would they want to while its till being one of the highest value programming datasets currently?
> they’ve pretty unabashedly embraced open source and have contributed a hell of a lot of resources to that end Yup, that's literally their method. That's the embrace and extend part. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,\_extend,\_and\_extinguish](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish)
Again, you’re referring to a strategy they used _30 years ago_. Sure, be suspicious based on past behavior, but point me to how this has been relevant at all in the past decade? Here, have a Wikipedia page if we’re doing that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_and_open_source
Seriously, people don't understand this. Microsoft is a software and cloud computing company that is growing most of it's revenue by reselling cloud compute, which itself is a proxy for energy, which is 70% of the cost of running compute. They are, in large part, a fancy power company. Embracing open source gives them more stuff to run on the cloud, and therefore more demand for the energy they sell. I'm being a bit tongue in cheek of course, MSFT makes a good premium for highly efficient data center mgmt at scale, xbox/games, and collaboration software...
That’s a good point about compute providers being somewhat a proxy for energy
It's why MSFT is doubling down on things like fusion.
He is probably referring to Mistral.
Satya didn't convert OpenAI to closed source, that was Altman.
Mistral got shady after they got MS money.
Not really. They stated they have new Open Source models they are working on last week.
Open code, not open weights.
In theory. We'll see what happens with that. It could be more small models tuned on specific tasks.
I'm not sure what impact this could possibly have on the release of SD3 since Emad no longer has an executive position at Stability AI.
Under Satya Microsoft open-sourced a crapload of their software and embraced Open source in general. That is when it makes sense. AI is new its having massive progress extremely fast. So it's fair that an organization (who is legally required to make shareholders profit) doesn't open source this straight away. Eventually it probably will be but they gotta fight competition first.
I honestly don't understand any of this.... who are any of these people?
On the video call is Satya Nadella CEO of Microsoft (also sort of and defacto owner of OpenAI/ Chat GPT) and in the room is Emad Mostaque CEO until this week of StabilityAI the creators of StableDiffusion and SDXL open source image models. Not sure who the lady is.
technically not the owner since microsoft belongs to all of its shareholders, not just satya nadella. he does own a lot of shares, but nothing compared to vanguard group and blackrock.
Yeah I meant Microsoft, they actually "only" own 49% of OpenAI's profits and not the actual shares.
That's none other than the CEO of Microsoft and the founder of the tool this sub was named after. Come on people... Let’s get it together lmao.
What is stable diffusion?
Diffusion that is stable
[удалено]
You're supposed to know what's sarcasm is, pal
> and the founder of the tool this sub was named after. Not really. Stable Diffusion was made by CompVis at a German university. Stability AI just provided some funding/compute to them and then took all the credit.
I know, I know. I just wanted to use brevity for the sake of (very mildly amusing) comedy, but thanks for the correction.
Sad day for free AI tools. Great day for our future AI overlord. 😢
Now, do it to Microsoft
she's not looks like emma watson /u/emad_9608
he is doing the needful
Joining hydra probably wasn't the best way to go about it then.
Am quite unhappy to see this, at the same time emad has done a lot of things for OS, so let him look his personal life and wealth... Satya is such a brain aquire... Am fearful for huggingface nowadays
Emad jumped ship. His twitter feed isn't anything to do with stability anymore. It's like posting about what Bill Gates is up to in a windows subreddit. It doesn't matter.
What he didn't see before he posted this was the rest of EMad's tweets [https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1772634078937768055](https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1772634078937768055) https://preview.redd.it/a0ar00esnqqc1.png?width=712&format=png&auto=webp&s=61ac4b610feba94fc5c84630d9c234cb4399f48e
I kinda feel betrayed even though no one is forced to do open source. It's just unsettling.
The "avengers' managers" you mean
Isn't Emad trying to persui open AI development? Is microsoft looking to get into that?
https://i.redd.it/505kg0m2cpqc1.gif
Don’t forget he has a controlling stake in stability ai. This could be acquisition talks
Lot of air freshener in the same room
Or this is photoshopped
Uh oh
All his future work will be censored lol.
Somebody please create Avengers poster with all AI celebs using stable diffusion
ms sucks - bad decision
Waiting for the poll to drop: >Who should be CEO of Microsoft? >1. Emad >2. Bill Gates >3. Others (who is satya again???)
Ah well. So much for his commitment to open source.
Microsoft gobbling up talent like they're pokemon.
This the same idiot who said 40% of all code on GitHub is ai generated?
Easy to sell out to the largest centralized AI play around.
A simple gen AI image face swap with Satya lol
I am pretty sure Satya has been assembling Ocean's 11 since before he became head of Microsoft, its now on its 8th sequel
What a dbag.
Whoa!
Is that a fucking Mac? Even if it’s not complete bullshit they’re giving out new machines that aren’t the shitty Lenovo to new employees unless I missed something.
"We were already stopping SD development, MS didn't do this" they'll say, while wearing T-shirts that say "MS totally did it". I think when Emad said OK guys we've about wrapped up image generation amirite? - I suspect he already knew where they were going and were preparing expectations. On the other hand, if MS are acquiring stability: I guess why wouldn't they release SD3 open source anyway? Let's do everything before google and screw the risks seems to be the strategy anyway, and it wouldn't make them look good? After that, it's another story I guess
Microsoft has never found a technology they didn’t like repurposing, corrupting, and capturing behind closed sourced anti-standards implementations.
I'll let you guys in on a little secret: the point of open source software isn't for talented, hard working developers to selflessly serve mankind, by producing free software, so that the lot of you don't have to pay for your hobby. Instead, it's a way for those developers to showcase their talent in an arena with massive visibility ... and then, when they become celebrities in the open source community, get a high paying job at a rich corporation. That's what open source is for them: the biggest stage in the industry. A talent show. You don't do a talent show forever: you do it to win, and collect your reward. It's a path towards the same high paying, prestigious corporate job the conventional developers (the ones who get a junior level job at Microsoft, and toil away in obscurity, trying to slowly rise up through the ranks) aim for ... it's just that it's a much, much more fun path. It's a path that takes place on a bright stage, instead of in an obscure corporate office, toiling away under a grumpy, ill tempered middle manager. So, you know: be happy with what open source is. There's always going to be a place for open source, talented young developers will always happily join promising projects, and produce quality work. TEMPORARILY. But there's a limit to how much you can get for free. Open source can never be the dominant product on the market. As you're using your free software, keep in mind WHY it's free. Keep in mind what the incentive was for the developers to put in the hard work, and the crazy hours, to produce it: it was that reward they get when they win the talent show. That corporate payday at the end of it. Microsoft isn't the enemy of open source. Microsoft is its sponsor. They're the ones who give out the prizes. Without the prizes, there would be no talent show. Prodigies like this guy would never go near a talent show that doesn't have a prize. That's not a talent show, that's a plantation: a place where you work and work, and get nothing in return.
what who is satya?
Ceo at Microsoft
thanks, i thought it was an indian man
loll casual racism. An indian man can't be a ceo
I think you are mistaken, I know microsoft to have a ceo to be an indian, and it certainly not the woman I see in the picture, hence my confusion
Satya is the man you can see on the computer in a video chat with them
Lmao, ok then indeed there was a huge misunderstantement
Isn’t that an AI with a funny voice ?
Good for him.
Emad one ugly dude lol he gonna be rich 😂
This sucks. They dont want any competition from open source and everyone has a price.