Comment by philipkglass
3 hours ago
The ChatGPT beta launched in 2022 with GPT 3.5 and 4 years later we have strong models from a bevy of organizations. It's as if Google launched in 1998 and by 2002 there were a dozen search engines competitive with or better than the original Google.
One of the common tasks LLMs are being trained to do is write software, which includes writing software for developing LLMs. That's reducing the cost to build alternative models and to run the ones that have already been trained and released. Many of these models aren't from America at all, so American billionaires don't get to decide how they're used. The competition is fiercer, and the potential for American monopolies or oligopolies is lower, than with technological waves of the recent past (e.g. mobile phone operating systems, search engines, social networking sites).
That doesn't really address what I was responding to, though, namely if the cost of intellectual labor is approximately 0. Yes, there is a possible outcome where a lower cost of developing software (which is not the only or even really most worthwhile intellectual activity) increases the amount of software and woohoo now more people can do more stuff and make more money. That might even be more likely. But if the cost of intellectual labor is nothing, well, that really doesn't add up very fast and all that's left is non intellectual labor. I suppose that people can start new companies to sell some new version of tomorrow's garbage, but not everyone wants to do that.
You asked "Don't the people who own the models and the companies who want to want to use the models to do all the cognitive tasks want to make money? Are they going to give their products and services away for free?"
No, they're not going to give their products and services away for free, but I don't think they're going to make fat profit margins. The very tools they're building are helping competitive alternatives to spring up quickly. That's little comfort if you worry about job losses, but the technology is not under the thumb of Altman/Thiel/Zuck (or any other small number of people).