> But the question is whether they are committed enough to AI to do it, and whether they have the required ML talent.
Given how business leaders throughout tech feel that AI is going to be transformative, I don't think commitment is really going to be a problem. Many leaders feel that "you either get good at AI or you don't exist in 10 years".
In terms of attracting talent, there are 3 main things top AI folks look for:
1. Money (they are people after all)
2. The infrastructure (both hardware and people/organization-wise) to support large AI projects.
3. The willingness to release these AI projects to a large swath of people (to have "impact" as folks like to say).
E.g. Google had 1 and 2 but their reticence to release their models and corporate infighting made many of the top Google researchers leave for gigs elsewhere. I think it remains to be seen how Apple will handle #3 as well.
Given how business leaders throughout tech feel that AI is going to be transformative, I don't think commitment is really going to be a problem. Many leaders feel that "you either get good at AI or you don't exist in 10 years".
In terms of attracting talent, there are 3 main things top AI folks look for:
1. Money (they are people after all)
2. The infrastructure (both hardware and people/organization-wise) to support large AI projects.
3. The willingness to release these AI projects to a large swath of people (to have "impact" as folks like to say).
E.g. Google had 1 and 2 but their reticence to release their models and corporate infighting made many of the top Google researchers leave for gigs elsewhere. I think it remains to be seen how Apple will handle #3 as well.