News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by nopurpose on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @06:07PM (#45675757)
> Google et al. were at one point pinnacle technologies too, but this was 20 years ago.

In 2017 Google literally gave us transformer architecture all current AI boom is based on.

Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by canpan on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @06:26PM (#45675948)
That does remind a little of Kodak, inventing the digital camera.
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by noosphr on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @06:10PM (#45675795)
And what did they do with it for the next five years?
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by fooker on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @07:51PM (#45676612)
Well, there was this wild two year drama where they had people fight and smear each other over whether wasting energy for LLMs is ethical.

https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/google-ai-chief-says...

That made plenty of scientists and engineers at google avoid AI for a while.

Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by seanmcdirmid on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @06:32PM (#45676005)
Used it to do things? This seems like a weird question. OpenAI took about the same amount of time to go big as well (Sam was excited about open AI in 2017, but it took 5+ years for it to pan out into something used by people).
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by keeda on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @08:57PM (#45677015)
I think the point is that they hoarded the technology for internal use instead of opening it up to the public, like OpenAI did with ChatGPT, thus kicking off the current AI revolution.

As sibling comments indicate, reasons may range from internal politics to innovator's dilemma. But the upshot is, even though the underlying technology was invented at Google, its inventors had to leave and join other companies to turn it into a publicly accessible innovation.

Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by seanmcdirmid on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @09:08PM (#45677078)
So I started at Google in 2020 (after Sam closed our lab down in 2017 to focus on OpenAI), and if they were hoarding it, I at least had no clue about it. To be clear, my perspective is still limited.
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by keeda on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @10:27PM (#45677513)
Fair enough, maybe a better way to put it is: why was the current AI boom sparked by ChatGPT and not something from Google? It's clear in retrospect that Google had similar capabilities in LaMDA, the precursor to Gemini. As I recall it was even announced a couple years before ChatGPT but wasn't released (as Bard?) until after ChatGPT.

LaMDA is probably more famous for convincing a Google employee that it was sentient and getting him fired. When I heard that story I could not believe anybody could be deceived to that extent... until I saw ChatGPT. In hindsight, it was probably the first ever case of what is now called "AI psychosis". (Which may be a valid reason Google did not want to release it.)

Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by dekhn on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @11:51PM (#45677999)
Google had been burned badly in multiple previous launches of ML-based products and their leadership was extremely cautious about moving too quickly. It was convenient for Google that OpenAI acted as a first mover so that Google could enter the field after there was some level of cultural acceptance of the negative behaviors. There's a whole backstory where Noam Shazeer had come up with a bunch of nice innovations and wanted to launch them, but was only able to do so by leaving and launching through his startup- and then returned to Google, negotiating a phenomenal deal (Noam has been at Google for 25 years and has been doing various ML projects for much of that time).
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by Jyaif on Thursday October 23, 2025 @02:35AM (#45678842)
> badly in multiple previous launches of ML-based products

Which ML-based products?

> It was convenient for Google that OpenAI acted as a first mover

That sounds like something execs would say to fend of critics. "We are #2 in AI, and that's all part of the plan"

Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by keeda on Thursday October 23, 2025 @04:17PM (#45686526)
Thanks for the helpful context. Google being risk averse is definitely a common criticism I've heard. I can't think of what previous problematic launches could have been, but ironically all the ones I remember offhand were after the release of Gemini!
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by dekhn on Thursday October 23, 2025 @07:54PM (#45689028)
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by woooooo on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @09:42PM (#45677275)
I think "hoarding" is the wrong connotation. They were happy to have it be a fun research project alongside alphago while they continued making money from ads.
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by jimbo_joe on Thursday October 23, 2025 @06:09AM (#45680206)
Pre-ChatGPT OpenAI produced impressive RL results but their pivot to transformers was not guaranteed. With all internet data, infinite money, and ~800x more people, Google's internal LLMs were meh at best, probably because the innovators like Radford would constantly be snubbed by entrenched leaders (which almost happened in OpenAI).
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by Marazan on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @06:20PM (#45675890)
Damn, those goal posts moved fast.
Re:Meta is axing 600 roles across its AI division by HDThoreaun on Wednesday October 22, 2025 @07:19PM (#45676381)
and then sat on it for half a decade because they worried it would disrupt their search empire. Googles invention of transformers is a top 10 example of the innovators dilemma.