As someone who would be in a position to advise enterprises on whether to adopt Frontier, there is simply not enough information for me to follow the "Contact Sales" CTA.
We need technical details, example workflows, case studies, social proof and documentation. Especially when it's so trivial to roll your own agent.
I’m imagining this is like ai native slack. Which would be a super useful thing. But I’m with you, who knows? I had a ceo sign up - I’m curious to see one of my companies try it out.
> The way work gets done has changed, and enterprises are starting to feel it in big ways.
Why do they say all of this fluff when everyone knows it’s not exactly true yet. Just makes me be cynical of the rest.
When can we say we have enough AI? Even for enterprise? I would guess that for the majority of power users you could stop now and people would be generally okay with it, maybe some further into medical research or things that are actually important.
For Sam Altman and microslop though it seems to be a numbers game, just have everyone in and own everything. It’s not even about AGI anymore I feel.
I am already tired of the disaster that is social media. Hilariously, we’ve gotten to the point that multiple countries are banning social media for under 18s.
The costs of AI slop are going to be paid by everyone, social media will ironically becoming far less useful, and the degree of fraud we will see will be … well cyber fraud is already terrifying, what’s the value of infinity added to infinity.
I would say that tech firms are definitely running around setting society on fire at this point.
God, they built all of this on absurd amounts of piracy, and while I am happy to dance on the grave of the MPAA and RIAA, the farming of content from people who have no desire to be harvested is absurd. I believe wikipedia has already started seeing a drop in traffic, which will lead to a reduction in donations. Smaller sites are going to have an even worse time.
> Why do they say all of this fluff when everyone knows it’s not exactly true yet.
There isn’t an incentive not to lie when people will read a lie, understand it to be a lie, and then characterize the lie as “not true yet”. Like if your audience has already invented a term to excuse your lies before you start talking, you categorically do not need to tell the truth.
If people judged OpenAI/Sam Altman’s statements under the premise that they are either true or untrue and that there’s no third thing I imagine that we wouldn’t hear as much about OpenAI.
I have a hard time believing that the right move for most organizations that aren't already bought into an OpenAI enterprise plan is going to be building their entire business around something like this. This ties you to one model provider that has been having issues keeping up with the other big labs and provides what looks like superficially some extremely useful tools but with unclear amounts of rigor. I don't think I would want to build my business on this if I was an AI-native company that was just starting right now unless they figure out how to make this much more legible and transparent to people.
Great, some more bullshit our founders are going to force onto the company while they never use it, ignore everyone’s feedback that it doesn’t work, and expect everything to be done twice as fast now
> “Partnering with OpenAI helps us give thousands of State Farm agents and employees better tools to serve our customers. By pairing OpenAI’s Frontier platform and deployment expertise with our people, we’re accelerating our AI capabilities and finding new ways to help millions plan ahead, protect what matters most, and recover faster when the unexpected happens.”
— Joe Park, Executive Vice President and Chief Digital Information Officer at State Farm
Ok how about you tell us one thing this shit is actually doing instead of vague nonsense.
Well, even working as an AI engineer is no longer secure. It may soon be the case that all humans work for bots created by others. Is that the universal salary we are talking about?
> "75% of enterprise workers say AI helped them do tasks they couldn’t do before."
> "At OpenAI alone, something new ships roughly every three days, and that pace is getting faster."
- We're seeing all these productivity improvements and it seems as though devs/"workers" are being forced to output so much more, are they now being paid proportionally for this output? Enterprise workers now have to move at the pace of their agents and manage essentially 3-4 workers at all times (we've seen this in dev work). Where are the salary bumps to reflect this?
- Why do AI companies struggle to make their products visually distinct OpenAI Frontier looks the exact same as OpenAI Codex App which looks the exact same as GPT
- OpenAI going for the agent management market share (Dust, n8n, crewai)
> "At OpenAI alone, something new ships roughly every three days, and that pace is getting faster."
This is a weird flex. Organizations have long strived to ship multiple times per day, it’s even one of the main business metrics for “high” performance orgs in DORA.
The fact that the premier “AI” company is barely able to deliver at a rate that is considered “high” instead of “medium” (the line is at shipping once per week) tells me that even at OpenAI writing the code is not the bottleneck.
Organizational inefficiency is as usual the real culprit.
> This is happening for AI leaders across every industry, and the pressure to catch up is increasing.
> Enterprises are feeling the pressure to figure this out now, because the gap between early leaders and everyone else is growing fast.
> The question now isn’t whether AI will change how work gets done, but how quickly your organization can turn agents into a real advantage.
FOMO at its finnest. "Quick before you're left behind for good this time!"
The idea itself has sensibility. It is the kind of AI application I've been pitching to companies, though without going all in on agents. Though I think it would be foollish for any CEO to build this on top of OpenAi, instead of a self-hosted model, and also train the model for them. You're just externalizing your internal knowledge this way.
52 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 76.0 ms ] threadWe need technical details, example workflows, case studies, social proof and documentation. Especially when it's so trivial to roll your own agent.
Why do they say all of this fluff when everyone knows it’s not exactly true yet. Just makes me be cynical of the rest.
When can we say we have enough AI? Even for enterprise? I would guess that for the majority of power users you could stop now and people would be generally okay with it, maybe some further into medical research or things that are actually important.
For Sam Altman and microslop though it seems to be a numbers game, just have everyone in and own everything. It’s not even about AGI anymore I feel.
I’m good for now.
I am already tired of the disaster that is social media. Hilariously, we’ve gotten to the point that multiple countries are banning social media for under 18s.
The costs of AI slop are going to be paid by everyone, social media will ironically becoming far less useful, and the degree of fraud we will see will be … well cyber fraud is already terrifying, what’s the value of infinity added to infinity.
I would say that tech firms are definitely running around setting society on fire at this point.
God, they built all of this on absurd amounts of piracy, and while I am happy to dance on the grave of the MPAA and RIAA, the farming of content from people who have no desire to be harvested is absurd. I believe wikipedia has already started seeing a drop in traffic, which will lead to a reduction in donations. Smaller sites are going to have an even worse time.
There isn’t an incentive not to lie when people will read a lie, understand it to be a lie, and then characterize the lie as “not true yet”. Like if your audience has already invented a term to excuse your lies before you start talking, you categorically do not need to tell the truth.
If people judged OpenAI/Sam Altman’s statements under the premise that they are either true or untrue and that there’s no third thing I imagine that we wouldn’t hear as much about OpenAI.
Because it's easy to paraphrase in a myriad of ways without having any real information.
A renowned scientist coined the term "bullshitting" for it, I think.
Downside: your employees’ agents decide that they should collectively bargain.
OpenAI might burn through all their money, and end up dropping support for these features and/or being sold off for parts altogether.
Ok how about you tell us one thing this shit is actually doing instead of vague nonsense.
> "At OpenAI alone, something new ships roughly every three days, and that pace is getting faster."
- We're seeing all these productivity improvements and it seems as though devs/"workers" are being forced to output so much more, are they now being paid proportionally for this output? Enterprise workers now have to move at the pace of their agents and manage essentially 3-4 workers at all times (we've seen this in dev work). Where are the salary bumps to reflect this?
- Why do AI companies struggle to make their products visually distinct OpenAI Frontier looks the exact same as OpenAI Codex App which looks the exact same as GPT
- OpenAI going for the agent management market share (Dust, n8n, crewai)
Let me increase salary to all my employees 2x, because productivity is 4x'ed now - never said a capitalist.
Increased efficiency benefits capital not labor; always good to remember to look at which side you prefer to be on
This is a weird flex. Organizations have long strived to ship multiple times per day, it’s even one of the main business metrics for “high” performance orgs in DORA.
The fact that the premier “AI” company is barely able to deliver at a rate that is considered “high” instead of “medium” (the line is at shipping once per week) tells me that even at OpenAI writing the code is not the bottleneck.
Organizational inefficiency is as usual the real culprit.
> Enterprises are feeling the pressure to figure this out now, because the gap between early leaders and everyone else is growing fast.
> The question now isn’t whether AI will change how work gets done, but how quickly your organization can turn agents into a real advantage.
FOMO at its finnest. "Quick before you're left behind for good this time!"
The idea itself has sensibility. It is the kind of AI application I've been pitching to companies, though without going all in on agents. Though I think it would be foollish for any CEO to build this on top of OpenAi, instead of a self-hosted model, and also train the model for them. You're just externalizing your internal knowledge this way.