Thread

1. ryanschaefer · 1790190580 · focus · HN ↗

   I’m confused why AI companies are using agents in-house for this type of research instead of partnering externally.

   I guess the improvement loop is tighter and they have more control over how discoveries can be used for marketing?

   But, in my mind, it begins to feel like they are setting themselves up to be “everything” companies instead of focusing on their core product…

   1. jackb4040 · 1790191960 · focus · HN ↗

      A chatbot for cancer researchers to talk to is worth single-digit billions at most. Anthropic is already valued at over a trillion dollars, on the premise that they can replace the majority of jobs in most knowledge industries. All the announcements about hacking / math problems / biological science are meant to create the impression that that strategy works and is repeatable across industries.

      1. sigmoid10 · 1790192621 · focus · HN ↗

         Cancer research is a lot harder for LLMs than math millennium problems though, because there is no fast feedback loop to iterate on. Even if you have a really good idea based on a solid theoretical insight, doing the experiments using in-vitro/mice/monkeys/humans can take years or even decades. I have no doubt that AI will help find new avenues that boost certain parts of research in these fields, but I don't see a potential for a drastic change until we at the very least give LLMs a direct way to interact with lab equipment and train them using RL on it.

         1. Ericson2314 · 1790193419 · focus · HN ↗

            RL robotics is increasingly something that cannot be avoided, I think.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.