• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    15 days ago

    That’s not a bad way of defining it, as far as totally objective definitions go. $100 billion is more than the current net income of all of Microsoft. It’s reasonable to expect that an AI which can do that is better than a human being (in fact, better than 228,000 human beings) at everything which matters to Microsoft.

    • brie@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      Good observation. Could it be that Microsoft lowers profits by including unnecessary investments like acquisitions?

      So it’d take a 100M users to sign up for the $200/mo plan. All it’d take is for the US government to issue vouchers for video generators to encourage everyone to become a YouTuber instead of being unemployed.

        • kautau@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          14 days ago

          That’s basically Neuromancer, and at this point it seems that big tech companies are reading dystopian cyberpunk literature as next-gen business advice books, so you’re certainly right

        • brie@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          AI is already running all software companies as the principle growth philosophy, but that’s like saying that gold used to run Colorado and California in 1800s. The executives have no choice at all but bet all in on AI now.