Top
Best
New

Posted by alvis 12 hours ago

Dots: Always-on agents(openai.com)
515 points | 390 commentspage 11
waterTanuki 1 hour ago|
Early on in my career as a software engineer, I was told by my managers that I had to sell my ideas as an elevator pitch to get anywhere. If I couldn't explain why a feature or fix would improve the business, it would go into the wastebin.

Colour me surprised then when I see, since circa 2024, an absolute deluge of AI products coming from these companies, each with their own naming scheme, marketing page, and accompanying hype post, and despite giving them MORE than the 30 second elevator pitch interval, I am left not understanding what it is they want to sell me. I have claude, I have codex, I get my work done just fine with each. I don't need another product for this. Any software these companies try pushing always ends up being something I could've made with their own AI models in a day and then never end up using. What's the end game here? What's the goal? What's the moat? I'm not sold on a single product outside of codex and claude code.

dgellow 12 hours ago||
I cannot fathom how much compute will be wasted with that type of always on agentic systems
rglover 12 hours ago|
Forget the compute, what about the energy (and other resource) requirements?
dgellow 11 hours ago|||
Yes that’s what I meant. Compute requires energy, infrastructure, etc. easily more than 90% of it will be wasted, just LLMs processing meaningless data in cronjobs, for the few instances where there is something actually meaningful to report to the user
matchbok3 11 hours ago|||
Do you want to ban almonds because they require a lot of water? (1000x more AI?)
rglover 9 hours ago|||
People aren't mortgaging their existence to get a piece of the almond market.
dgellow 11 hours ago|||
I’m so suspicious of that exact claim being repeated everywhere since a few weeks, that really feels like a slogan astroturfed. It’s also fairly shallow analysis. Water is localized, you cannot do a meaningful comparison without taking in account the impact on specific water sources, an aggregate doesn’t give you any insight (other than having a slogan)
eutropia 10 hours ago||
More applications need the ability to log in as a "read-only" mode, so you can more safely grant access to tools like this.

I can imagine something like Dots being utterly invaluable for running a traditional brick and mortar business, streamlining all of the admin work, but until they're really safe and well integrated we'll have to wait...

everfrustrated 11 hours ago||
Lolz https://dot.com goes to xAI's GrokBot (the competition)
stronglikedan 10 hours ago||
Holy crap that is some expensive food in the demo video. These people are truly disconnected from reality.
outside1234 8 hours ago||
Do people think "frontier intelligence" is going to sound as cringey as "cyberspace" in two years?
terhechte 11 hours ago||
> Dots are rolling out in ChatGPT on web, mobile, and desktop starting today to Pro users in markets excluding the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the UK

Living in the EU, I suspected as much. Still sad. I understand it is because we voted in a bunch of imbeciles, still sad though.

alienbaby 11 hours ago|
yea that annoyed be, being in the UK :/
jesse_dot_id 12 hours ago||
The only reasons I can think for OpenAI and Meta to make their always-on agents cute little cartoons are all nefarious in nature.
duplessitous 12 hours ago||
Really, none? Was Microsoft nefarious when they deployed Clippy? I feel like there is an incredibly obvious reason that is not nefarious at all: the average consumer likes cute things
jpnc 12 hours ago|||
> Was Microsoft nefarious when they deployed Clippy?

Yes. It was predictive programming for getting (paper)clipped by AI.

layer8 11 hours ago|||
The average consumer doesn’t have a $100+ ChatGPT Pro subscription though.
duplessitous 10 hours ago||
Isn't that a vote for 'not nefarious' as they are not deploying it widely across their user base? Unclear on the point
layer8 7 hours ago||
My point is that your argument regarding the average customer doesn’t seem to apply. But neither do I believe in a nefarious motive.
tavavex 11 hours ago|||
People are already doing most of the work of anthropomorphising LLMs, so OpenAI is just capitalizing on that. Drawing a face on it will make people even more attached to the LLM, they will treat it even more like a person. If they ever get desperate for money they could change the cancel flow to have the cute character plead not to die, and play a cartoony animation of its death when the subscription is canceled. It would stop at least a few users.
galaxyLogic 10 hours ago||
Good point. I've though about my own mental attitude when interacting with AI agents. When they do something good I feel like saying "Thank You". Does that make sense? I guess it does because it communicates to the model their output was correct. But it feels silly to say "thank You" to a machine. I guess I just have to get over it?
vovavili 11 hours ago|||
I actually greatly appreciate that I can put something cute on my sister's PC that comes from a developer that won't bundle it with malware. Seems like they fail miserably at being evil.
therealdrag0 12 hours ago|||
What’s nefarious about attracting users?
guywithahat 12 hours ago||
It could be to market more towards women, who they may have both independently determined aren't paying for AI as much. I don't have any data to go one way or another but I can imagine lots of reasons to make the agent cute that aren't nefarious
TheAtomic 12 hours ago||
That might be the worst advert I've ever seen. People looking up at childish Ai glow up god beings on huge screens in distinctly childish environments, with cliched decision-makers gasping for West Wing energy...repulsive.
hangrybear666 11 hours ago|
These recent product announcements sound like entirely plausible satire, but unfortunately most of these pages are not actually intended to be a joke, it's not even amusing, but mostly tiring.
More comments...