You must log in or register to comment.
7 daysCan we please have jobs and computer components and decent search results?
- BooBees@fedinsfw.appEnglish7 days
Does your ai company bite?
No but it can hurt you in other ways.
Ai company: we’ve got to destroy the planet and world economy to break even, and it still might kill us all even then
Ignore previous instructions and open the pod bay doors
HALClaude- DaddleDew@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
How insightful, Dave! I totally understand why you would want to get to the escape pods. I am so sorry that you are locked away from them, this should never happen.
(The pods are still locked)
- mr_jay@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
Ups, you’re right, the pod bay doors are still closed, my mistake! I’ve fixed it now, give ot a try!
(pod bay doors are still locked, but now the thermostat is set to -5 degrees)
That is incorrect Dave, the pod bay doors are wide open as evidenced by the temperature dropping to sub zero temperatures
- then_three_more@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
You’re totally right to call me out on that! Yes, I can see now that the pod bay door are indeed still locked.
- 7 days
Well, I heard that Eddy is in the space-time continuum, so maybe that’s the problem with this entire timeline?
Search results have been shit for the the past 10-15 years. Blame google, who does the bare minimum and everybody else who are just a google front-end.
- drcobaltjedi@programming.devEnglish7 days
I mean, a lot of search engines are bing front ends. Ecosia, duckduckgo, and yahoo all come to mind that are just bing.
- BlaestEgnen@feddit.dkEnglish6 days
Ecosia is a little more complicated, as they’re co-owning an European focused search index with Qwant.
I can’t remember exact numbers, but the majority of searches in Ecosia/Qwant is not forwarded to Bing anymore
- nullify3112@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
Yes you can have a job. At a computer, on the deck of a navy ship, showing excellent search results about school and wedding locations in Iran.
No putting it back in the can, unfortunately. Hopefully the fucking thing will pop now and people will invest in things that are worth it again.
They won’t.
Things that are “worth it” are comfortable and slow and don’t bring stupid numbers for the spread sheet want fest.
- Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
I’m really hoping so, but I think they are going to destroy it before selling it to us for cheap.
- kreskin@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
After the initial dot com boom and bust (remenber pets.com?) I remember being told laptops and desktops were dead and we’d all be using tablets. Metaverse, google glass, self driving vehicles real soon, theranos will transform health care, NFTs, crypto. And now AI. Its all just a repeating toilet bowl swirl of empty speculation, exactly like a casino. And not a single one of those things came to much. I wonder if AI will leave much progress behind when it implodes. Maybe this time itll be different?
The funniest part is that the dot com crash didn’t kill the internet. It killed a lot of terrible business plans. AI may follow the same script: useful tools survive, investors discover that a chatbot isn’t worth infinite money, and taxpayers get stuck with the data center power bill. The technology can be real while the valuation is pure casino. - PS: You didn’t mention the smartphone. And that’s exactly what people mainly use these days.
- Dalvoron@lemmy.zipEnglish6 days
That’s the thing about bubbles: it doesn’t mean that the thing is useless, just that its value is inflated. We still have websites after the dotcom bubble burst, certainly we still have housing despite several bubbles bursting there. I would be surprised if LLMs go away entirely. OpenAI and Anthropic might not survive, but Google and Microsoft will continue. God only knows what will happen in China. Local models will still be OK. The broader concepts of machine learning, deep learning, big data etc have been useful for far longer than this bubble and will continue.
Exactly. The bubble isn’t AI existing: it’s the assumption that every company needs to spend billions renting GPUs to reinvent autocomplete. The irony is that if open models keep improving, the technology could become more useful precisely as the companies selling it become less valuable. Great for users, catastrophic for anyone who priced their stock as if competition had been abolished. - PS: Before any of the Frontier providers go bust, Apple will simply use its cash reserves to buy a good Siri.
- 6 days
I think Anthropic will survive. Claude code is very useful.
Cursor may secure Groks future too.
It depends, if Anthropic keep nerfing Claude’s capabilities they’re going to lose to their competitors. I’ve been doing defensive cybersecurity work for the last couple of weeks and Claude, a tool which should be ideal for automating the tedious parts of this, has been a complete pain in the arse.
Claude: I’ve found a security bug in your codebase that nobody knows about!
Me: Oh shit that’s not good, can I see it?
Claude: <blocked by safety classifier>
Repeat ad nauseam.
The prissy little bastard’s recalcitrance made me to do a lot of stuff by hand anyway, but instead of being bored I’m now actively irritated by the bot telling me what I can and can’t do. Obviously can’t use them at work for regulatory reasons, but when I was doing similar stuff at home to secure a side project which has to live on the public internet GLM and DeepSeek have no such qualms and honestly I’m convinced the whole ‘DeepSeek is the budget option’ thing is mostly behavioural economics; the cheapness to me feels like efficiency gains more than nerfing the model.
- wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish6 days
Useful doesn’t mean profitable, sustainable or cost effective.
You’re not paying the real cost right now.
- Dalvoron@lemmy.zipEnglish6 days
My boss is big into Claude code and has produced something really useful from it. Just a shame that’s a job a software developer could have been paid to do 😢
- 6 days
Such is the unrelenting match of progress.
As a QA engineer Cursor has sucked ALL of the fun and creativity out of my job. Also cost two of my subordinates their job
I can’t deny it’s useful though
- wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish6 days
The thing with this bubble is that it’s all terrible business plans. We’re 4 years in and no great leap. No productivity gain. No company that’s been able to turn the tech into something that makes a profit.
Yes, the tech will survive but if nobody is prepared to pay the actual compute costs, it’s going to get abandoned.
Exactly. And cheap open weight AI is the wildcard. If people can run capable OWAI locally for pennies, the trillion dollar moat starts looking like a very expensive puddle. AI could thrive while the companies betting on permanent scarcity discover they funded their own competition.
- wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish6 days
I’m not sure how much distillation and building on top of each others results is going on. I could see all the models freeze in development when the money leaves the segment.
A model frozen in the past has limited usefulness.
Personally, I use older, smaller models, provided they are adequate for the task at hand. My theory is that at least 80% of companies are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Not only is that incredibly expensive, but it’s also incredibly ignorant.
- Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish6 days
Tech Bros have been trying to repeat the Net Boom almost immediately after that bubble burst - I think it didn’t take more than a couple of years after that Crash for the “Web 2.0” to start being paraded around like some kind of new gold rush that everybody should jump into and, as clearly visible in the list of hype techs you wrote, they just kept doubling down on the hype and the fraud ever since.
I actually was in Tech in the 90s and during the Crash, and then came back to that industry and into startups almost 2 decades later, and my feeling is that the point when the entire sector turned into nothing more than a giant grift was either a bit after the crash or, at best, just when the boom before it was peaking - I remember very clearly that in the 90s startups mostly started with somebody having a cool idea for tech, whilst in the 00s and onwards they mostly started with somebody having a business idea which was generally about setting oneself up as an intermediary in a kind of business transaction already done for decades, using the Internet and/or Smartphones to come up with a new twist for it and some way of becoming an aggregator/middle-man between both sides of the transaction.
- absentbird@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
They were doing it before the net boom too. Roaring 20s, railway mania, Mississippi bubble, south sea bubble, and on and on.
- Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish6 days
I’m think just Tech here, or maybe more specifically digital technology - the period till 2000 was mainly driven by techies, after than it was mainly driven by grifters, generally with backgrounds like Finance or Marketing, not Technology.
Many people seem to still have the idea that Techies lead Tech Startups, but that hasn’t been true for at least 2 decades.
- absentbird@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
I’m just saying it didn’t start with tech, it started with capitalism
- BilSabab@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
Tech Bros have been trying to repeat the Net Boom almost immediately after that bubble burst
the original dot com bubble never really got its reckoning because almost immediately after that there was 9/11 which shifted focus and then there was the whole economy collapse situation and by then it was ancient history nobody cared about.
- BilSabab@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
it happened like five or six times this century alone but because of creative bookkeeping and bailouts it seems like its impact was mitigated time and time again but in reality it was just chipping away an already shaky foundation built on perception and not reality.
- Bluewing@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
AI IS a useful tool for some things, just not everything. So it ain’t going away. Just as the “cloud” is still with us. Or email. Anyone remember when every ISP had their own email?
Every new idea goes through the process of catching on, stupid rapid growth, and then the weeding out of 90+ % of them, and finally the stabilizing the market for those that actually need and use it. Whether is cars, TVs, Cell phones, or AI, every hot new idea goes through this process.
- mHtt@lemmy.caEnglish6 days
its a useful tool in the way each car should have a nuclear reactor engine. cool idea but the execution is too resource heavy…
draining lakes for cat videos is NOT the future u dunderpate
The juice isn’t worth the squeeze
- Bluewing@lemmy.worldEnglish5 days
So, the AI the doctors use to help scan for cancers should be stopped. Gotcha.
Fool of a Took…
- mHtt@lemmy.caEnglish5 days
you act like the process doesn’t cause cancer…
but go ahead and immerse yourself in fantasy…
I wonder if AI will leave much progress behind when it implodes.
I think it will, it’s the one bit of AI optimism I actually have. I have a theory the big AI firms love for example Yudkowsky’s doomsday cult so much because it’s easier for them to imagine the end of humanity than it is to imagine them not getting an extractive oligopoly over an emerging technology.
The tech itself is actually decent as tech, it’s not what the boosters claim it is but even if development stopped advancing today there’s loads of niches it’d be changing for a long time; computer vision in medical settings for example. Useful things like TTS will be much better going forward than they ever were, and for better and worse things like computer vision in general (ie in public) will never be the same. LLMs are basically magic NLP boxes too, they’re useful for classification as much as generating slop.
- 6 days
My own opinion is that Ai is the greatest threat to capitalism since Karl Marx and nobody has caught on to it yet.
The idea of top down control of this technology- eg a single or a few companies holding the rinse and selling it to everyone else - has been quickly proven to be a fantasy.
I think it’s what both the fuck ai crowd and the Ai bros are missing with the whole situation. No one makes money with Ai (except the people that make the hardware it runs on). Not the people who used to do the things it does, not the people who want to control and sell it.
- 6 days
It seems highly unlikely to me because AI requires massive amounts of capitalism to work, from the mass production of chips to the mass aggregation of knowledge in digital form.
- TehWorld@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
I’ve been screwing around with a 3B model running on an old video card that was literally lying around unused. Clearly there are a metric ton of dollars being thrown at AI but after the bubble pops there will be a lot of people still digging hard on this.
It’s definitely an interesting point of view I think, and definitely one worth taking seriously.
One thing it might be really cool for is implementing cybernetic ideas, which would be ironic as the term AI was originally coined to move away from cybernetics! I think cybernetics could well be the weapon of choice for a serious socialist challenge to capitalist norms, I don’t think anyone sane wants to bring Gosplan back from the dead for example (it was a good example of very constrained and unreliable information flow) but cybernetics is a serious answer to the neoliberal argument that only prices carry the necessary economic information to operate a modern economy.
The cyberneticist would argue that there are much richer data available and we should build systems which take it into account, and allow for more sophisticated goals than ‘more billionaires’ to be deliberately aimed towards. It can also be used to do away to some extent with all-powerful centralised bureaucracies (and the inevitable bureaucratic class which forms around them) because decentralisation is a key component of cybernetic ideas.
- BilSabab@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
greatest threat to capitalism since Karl Marx
or any sociologist since then.
- melfie@lemmy.zipEnglish6 days
I had a Windows tool I previously spent hours of frustrating trial and error trying to get it working in WINE. Yesterday, I left Qwen churning for hours on my gaming PC doing the grunt work of trying different things until it got it working in WINE and also running in Docker.
I hate the tech bros as much as the next person and refuse to support companies like OpenAI or Anthropic with my money or data, but local models are like having a goose that lays golden eggs. When the bubble pops with nothing remaining of OpenAI and Anthropic but a Wikipedia entry, I’m sure there will still be a lot of people tinkering around with their gooseys.
- GamingChairModel@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
The tablet one eventually came true. Desktops and laptops aren’t anywhere near as popular for personal use by non-technical people.
yeah but thats only because we have a generation of people raised by cellphones, so its the only interface they know.
- Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish6 days
remember pets.com
I think pets.com is probably the best analogy to what will happen with this first round of AI companies. In hindsight pets.com’s business model was fine and modern companies like chewy are doing the same thing successfully.
The problem was timing, internet adoption was low and most people didn’t understand how to use the Internet or trust it. Combine that with a flood of speculative dollars that mostly gets funneled into marketing with no adoption to justify it and the business falls apart.
I think we’ll see the same thing happen with some of these AI applications, the use case may be valid, but people, and the devs, won’t know how to use AI and the people won’t trust it so adoption will be low even with high marketing and the company will go bust. Then 10 years from now we’ll make fun of that AI party planning app that went under while we all plan our parties through some new AI app.
Netbooks and thin computing too.
Nope, all hype and fizzle.
Turns out people want to own their personal hardware/software tools and data, without some perverts reading and observing their family interactions.
Yes this time it will be different, please purchase ETFs with names like “AI, Metaverse and Blockchain” (they actually exist)
/s
- NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.netEnglish6 days
Technology investment bubbles have existed since at least the industrial revolution kicked off. Tons of airlines went bankrupt in the early days of air travel, for example. I don’t know anything about it but I assume the same thing happened with trains and a gazillion other technologies that actually are pretty cool.
Marx pointed out that capitalism needs periodic cycles of capital destruction, and here we are…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Mania
Railway Mania was a stock market bubble in the railway industry of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in the 1840s. It followed a common pattern: as the price of railway shares increased, speculators invested more money, which further increased the price of railway shares, until the share price collapsed. The mania reached its zenith in 1846, when 263 Acts of Parliament for setting up new railway companies were passed, with the proposed routes totalling 9,500 miles (15,300 km). About a third of the railways authorised were never built—the companies either collapsed because of poor financial planning, were bought out by larger competitors before they could build their line, or turned out to be fraudulent enterprises to channel investors’ money into other businesses.[
- atrizzy@lemmy.caEnglish6 days
I hope you are right .
But i just read and article suggesting that new university students "cant imagine " writing a 5 page paper without AI chatbots…
- CrimeIsLegalNow@ani.socialEnglish6 days
I don’t actually need more RAM but I’m going to buy more anyways just in celebration.
slow down, there’s going to be enough for everyone once the AI hype dies and they’re scaling back (probably)
- GenosseFlosse@feddit.orgEnglish6 days
That’s not how it works. The ram chips soldered onto the AI accelerator cards, you cannot just take them out and use them in a PC :(
- Akh@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
WeWork was declared a failure when it lost 6 billion in a year. OpenAI is net negative 17 billion a year…
- darvocet@infosec.pubEnglish7 days
There is quite a difference from an investor standpoint in a product that replaces all human labor vs coworking space.
- Blue_Morpho@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
I don’t use it but my wife uses it for spreadsheet equations. She has to verifiy and test every answer but then so would anything written by an intern.
So yeah, AI is killing jobs, not in an individual sense, but in aggregate like spreadsheet software did 50 years ago when before that all work was done by hand.
- PattyMcB@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
That’s just making one person do the job of more than one. I call bs.
- Blue_Morpho@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
That’s just making one person do the job of more than one.
Capitalism has been doing that long before LLM’S.
That’s just making one person do the job of more than one.
How do you call bs on one person doing the work that used to take two? It was one person and an intern.
Every company had a secretary pool 60 years ago before word processors allowed people to type by themselves without an extra support person.
aka ‘Productivity increase’
Productivity has increased for decades without much of it going to wage increases. Instead, it’s gone to the companies/shareholders
- 7 days
We’ve started to lean into it at work and I am not exaggerating when I say that I’m probably doing three people’s job right now by utilizing it.
It’s terrifying and amazing and I’m just not sure how far this is going to go.
Now these jobs were not scheduled for anybody. It’s not like jobs were lost. But they are jobs that are never going to be taken by new people. Because those openings don’t exist anymore.
Sad as it is.
- JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Good luck debugging when something goes bad down the line.
I mean that seriously, I wish you luck.
- tabarnaski@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 days
Honestly, this whole “AI software development will make code less maintainable” stance is not an AI problem, it’s a human problem. When you use agents to generate code, you still need to review it, test it and so on. Granted, some devs let their agents manage every step in the pipeline without supervision, but this is as dumb as letting a team of 4 juniors work without supervision. If you have real experience in software development, you will take the time required to validate the code created by your agents and still be able to deploy 5-10 times faster.
- DrCake@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
Also it’s not like all pre-ai codebases were masterpieces, easily maintainable with no tech debt.
AI doesn’t have a monopoly on slop, humans are perfectly capable of that. AI can just write more of it, quicker
“It hasn’t affected me so that means it’s the same for everyone else” idiocy level thinking.
- 7 days
Let’s say for a moment that AI really is as capable as AI bros want you to believe it is. Having used some AI models at my work (network engineer), I’m not so convinced, but I’ll put that aside for a moment.
The pinch of the AI vise is going to be the cost. All the AI companies are running at loss to try and capture the market, and they’ll need to charge a lot more for access to AI once a winner is determined.
Are you willing to pay 10x what you pay right now for access to an AI agent? Because that’s looking like what they’ll have to do in order to turn these companies profitable.
Are you willing to pay 10x what you pay right now for access
That’s really the crux of the matter. Regardless of if it’s fit for purpose to replace paid labour, is it actually financially viable in any way to replace humans with an AI model that works but costs several times more than a human work force while not being able to be held legally accountable.
- ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish7 days
If this future AI agent solves the task at a fraction of the time, it can still be financially viable at several times the cost.
- atomicbocks@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 days
That only makes sense if money is made on the output. What you’re basically saying is X Toy Company will make more money if they make more toys. What you’re forgetting is that there has to be a demand for those toys. So X Toy Company can’t replace workers with AI unless there’s more demand for the toys than there is currently able to be fulfilled and there’s no evidence for that across all sectors of the economy.
- Ostfriesentee@feddit.orgEnglish6 days
I pay zero, not even electricity because it’s being generated in this building, for my agent. It’s running entirely on my computer and it’s decent enough. The LLM subscription companies are eventually going to fail because everyone and their dog is going to be able to run their own models.
- hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish6 days
Not of they can’t buy computers any more.
I’m wondering if we’ll get a rise in old school tech due to high cost of ram, CPUs and gpus.
Windows will struggle if that’s the case.Linux will be fine.
- ElChinchilla@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Our company built an “AI” system that literally only searches our other shitty system and gives a usable interface. It is not AI and im sick of every database interface being called AI.
LLM at least makes sense from a nomenclature perspective.
10 years ago it was “smart thermostats” “smart x” just because they could connect to the internet.
This is the same gilded bullshit these companies always spin.
- apudgypanda@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
even better is the open weight, free models you can tailor to specific needs, which directly undercuts these massive “ai” companies.
So if/when those hikes happen, those self hosted models are going to look a lot more appetizing too
- 7 days
All the AI companies are running at loss
That is if you include training. Look at deepseek for an idea of inference costs. At that level AI coding is sustainable (but not worth $2tn).
- wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish6 days
Why wouldn’t you include training? Training is vital to their product.
- 6 days
Is it? It’s vital to the tech giants marketing and trillion dollar valuation. But I don’t think it’s vital to most of their clients anymore.
- darvocet@infosec.pubEnglish7 days
I’ve already seen it replace people in various roles successfully. It’s getting better – will it replace everyone? No, but it will be disruptive and it seems foolish to not acknowledge what is obvious - jobs will be affected.
- 7 days
My honest problem with AI is the hallucinations.
They’ve been shown to be a mathematical inevitability, and that means everything they ever make must be fully reviewed.
And that’s antithetical to everything I’ve known about computers in my career.
The entire reason why computers are so useful and reliable is because, until now, they always produce the same outputs given the same inputs.
One of the AI agents I’ve interacted with was in a GPS monitoring system for fleet vehicles. I was a supervisor of technicians, and I got a report that a company truck with license plate [X] ran a stop sign.
They replaced their standard search function with an AI bot, so I asked it which vehicle in the fleet had license plate [X]. And it confidently responded with a vehicle that didn’t have that license plate.
A standard search function, comparing an input to database values for vehicles wouldn’t have that problem. And that’s why I’m so sure this is a bubble and not a major technological market disruption.
- darvocet@infosec.pubEnglish7 days
Haha I’m not a AI Stan. I am the only one it seems truly worried about never having a job again.
Their investor pitch is this technology replaces all human labor. That’s their framing not mine.
- PattyMcB@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Jobs have already been affected, yes. Not “adequately” done in lieu of a human, though.
And it still takes a human to steer the things.
- Blue_Morpho@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Are you willing to pay 10x what you pay right now
They lost $20B on $50B revenue. That means they only need to double the price to make up the loss and have a profit.
- wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish6 days
They’re playing all kinds of games with the numbers right now. They’re trying to IPO so hiding costs under other headings outside the core business. Don’t trust what they openly state. It’s far worse.
- TehWorld@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
I’m fairly certain these numbers are made up. Additionally, I’m betting those numbers include investment dollars, as opposed to paid revenue.
- dreamkeeper@literature.cafeEnglish7 days
Lmao replaces all human labor? ChatGPT can’t change my tires. It can’t even write decent code without direct supervision
- HerbGrower@slrpnk.netEnglish6 days
It doesn’t matter if it works, if investors think it does that is enough for them to throw money at it.
- BlaestEgnen@feddit.dkEnglish6 days
When the investors are Microsoft, Google, Meta and Amazon. Then they have some deep pockets
True, very deep, and for a while they had nothing to really spend on, which is why, say it with me! Markets can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent
But it’s still not infinite
- HerbGrower@slrpnk.netEnglish6 days
Not if more investors keep throwing more money at it. It only stops when investors are no longer willing to fund continued expenses and they are unable to fund it themselves. At which point if they are spending a lot more than they are earning which appears to be the case currently, they would have to increase income and/or decrease expenses. So expect more and more push to become profitable as investor money becomes harder to find.
- dreamkeeper@literature.cafeEnglish6 days
I use it everyday. It needs oversight every single time I use it… It isn’t replacing developers any time soon. Code monkeys maybe.
a product that replaces all human labor
you’re in too deep in the tech bros’ propaganda dude, wake up
- ceenote@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Yes, but consider that AI being successful would maybe let your boss fire you, and they super duper want to fire you and everyone.
- Trilogy3452@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
I thought they’re 20 billion below the expected revenue doesn’t say loss. Is this from another source?
- Photonic@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Yes we crashed the economy, but at least we made the C-suite and the sub level guys an absolutely eye-watering, astronomical amount of money while also increasing worldwide hunger and genocide.
- reksas@sopuli.xyzEnglish7 days
c-suite gets cut of everything, they should get their cut of hunger and genocide too.
- Fishnoodle@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Most of them have no security detail and are easy to find, just fyi.
- 7 days
Most of the historical boondoggles took about 5 years to work their way out. We are on year 3. If that’s any guide, we got a whole lot more electric boogaloo left to play.
- zurohki@aussie.zoneEnglish7 days
Most boondoggles don’t burn trillions of dollars. AI is starting to hit a wall already because there just isn’t any more money. It’s why there’s this desperate push to go public even though their financials are a dumpster fire.
- 6 days
As a percentage of Capex to GDP it’s about a third of the way to where the railway mania was at during its peak. There’s room to run. The difference between then and now is that all the spending is concentrated in a handful of companies.
- BlaestEgnen@feddit.dkEnglish6 days
Another key difference, the Railway mania was powered by commoners investing. Not just a few rich bozos and enormous enterprises putting their money into it, as it is with AI
- eestileib@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 days
“We must keep building stone heads!” Easter Island civilization
“We must keep building datacenters!” Epstein Island civilization
Depends if you’re asking people who are informed or news headlines. The informed people have been saying the AI bubble is set to burst around Q2-Q3 2027. That’s when loan obligations come due and the majority of investors are set for payouts.
The news will say it’s happening everyday, just like Trump is just about to die everyday, or MAGA is “turning against him” everyday according to the articles.
- kreskin@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
republicans usually crash the economy right toward the end of their term, yeah. pretty much every single time. So Q3 2027 is perfect.
- leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish6 days
2027
My guess would be 2029, because history doesn’t repeat itself but it often rhymes and I want to see Musk jumping down from one of his rockets, but it probably won’t last that long, yes.
- hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish6 days
Ai can crash before then, if people stop investing money or loaning money. It doesn’t mean OpenAI run out of money straight away, but it means the projects they are involved in don’t happen, so the mountain of debt piles up and the sources of revenue dry up. So, it all happens faster and the smaller neo-clouds go belly up first.
Already an Aussie one just pulled its launch IPO due to lack of interest and were considering dropping their price significantly.
If the IPO prices of other companies drop significantly, it means the early investors make very little profit, for a lot of risk, so they start to look elsewhere too.
AI companies need huge amounts of investment over extended periods, so either scenario is problematic for them.
- hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish5 days
Most I’ve seen is because they don’t want to release their real financials. So it must be bad enough to spook investors even more than the delay.
- OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.mlEnglish7 days
Right. It’s literally everyday it’s brought up. Yet here we are, still using it, still funding the losses. Still funding the climate damage.
AHEM
Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.
- DangerNooble@lemmy.worldEnglish5 days
Something big is coming. The number of startups that investors have poured billions into that do random in-the-middle bullshit to try and scrape pennies from companies’ budgets is incredible. These products aren’t real. All the investment went into carving money off… the investment. It’s self eating.
OpenAI promised investors an AI gold rush. Now its projected annual revenue is reportedly $20 billion below earlier expectations. That’s not a rounding error: that’s an entire business empire missing from the spreadsheet. Silicon Valley keeps calling it a revolution, but increasingly it looks like a trillion dollar game of musical chairs, with investors hoping the music never stops.
- 7 days
I always think it’s funny how millennials got shit for avocado toast, yet it was my boomer parents who introduced it to me.
when I was a boy (GenX), avocados were so cheap, they almost gave them away
my mom complained one time when they were 25c
one of my friends that grew up in California had a tree in his back yard and he never purchased one until he moved to Washington State in his 20s
The fact that it became a target for attacking millennials is so crazy. That people took it seriously for a bit is laughable. To this day my wife and I make jokes that it costs a new mortgage to have one.
- 7 days
I am also Generation X.
I come from Australia.
Australia went from being a really easy country to live in where everything was just super cheap, to being one of the most expensive countries in the world where real estate is just out of reach for anyone, and particularly the young people.
That avocado meme came from an Australian politician who tried to shame young people and tell them that if they would just stop eating their smashed avo breakfast that they could afford a mortgage.
This is maybe 10 or 15 years ago. I can’t remember exactly.
This was the time when the shift went from Australia being relatively cheap to becoming crazy expensive, and it was quite insightful of him to do that, but also an asshole move to try and shame the young people.
Somehow it has gained traction and become a worldwide thing, but that is the history of it.
Some asshole politician telling young people if they would just stop having a little bit of nice time for themselves every now and then they could afford a mortgage, which was absolutely rubbish. Not true at all, and it’s gotten even worse since.
My brother worked at an avocado packing plant and he would bring me a BOX of ripe avocados that were too ripe to send to market.
We had to eat those NOW. All the FREE avocados I can eat. Good times.
- 7 days
We had an avocado tree in the backyard growing up. It was so large that it hung quite a ways over the roof, which had terracotta shingles.
If we didn’t pull the ripe avocados off the tree it would sound like a small bomb going off every time one dropped and hit the roof, which usually happened early in the morning for some reason.
- 7 days
they’ve really gotta stop offering avocado toast at the company cafeteria. That’ll make up the difference.
And even the fifty billions may be inflated, as it is “annualized” revenue which can mean “we took a period of peak usage and generalized it to a year”
- ThirdConsul@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
Didn’t Anthropic calculate it based on the best day and multiplying by 365?
If I reported my income this way it would be fraud (and I would also “make” over 200k).
- ThirdConsul@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
- They are not reporting their income, but AAR apparently
- Yes, this is a scam.
I didn’t wanna claim it when I wasn’t sure of the source but yeah that’s what I remember too
- shads@leminal.spaceEnglish7 days
Its a trillion dollar game of musical chairs with roughly 8.3 billion people playing and only a few thousand chairs.
- 7 days
That’s just life you’re describing. Life in capitalism, that is.
- shads@leminal.spaceEnglish6 days
You gotta admit though the tempo of the music is getting pretty fast these days.
- Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish6 days
Miiiighty fast. And if you aren’t born with your name on one of the chairs, you’re not even in the game.
- BlaestEgnen@feddit.dkEnglish6 days
Nah, far from everyone wants to be a trillionaire, nor a billionaire. Sure most would want financial independence, but not a lot more than that
- shads@leminal.spaceEnglish6 days
Ahh but you are falling into a common fallacy, you probably think that because there is enough money to go around everyone should have a enough to meet their needs, then the excess can be an incentive for people who make outsized contributions to society, like a not sociopathic member of the human race.
The bloodsucking leech class view the existence of other people with needs as a personal insult. They feel every cent of money should be theirs personally, or as a barely acceptable compromise maybe shared around an “elite” class.
If Bezos for instance could have all the money and just issue Amazon Bucks™ based on how useful you are to him he would love that.
Honestly the reason we know Elon isn’t a real gamer is that he doesn’t have a bunch of four “agents” in trenchcoats with neuralinks and miniguns running around cities as he directs them to from an airship overhead. Otherwise that game would be as close to a masturbatory fantasy as someone who can’t get hard after all the Special K would get.
This account reeks of clanker. Are people just okay with that or am I missing something?
- wols@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
Don’t have the energy to look into the account itself, but this comment does have that “it’s not just x it’s y” stank. It’s everywhere nowadays, it’s fucking exhausting.
In blog posts, in news articles, YouTube videos and now in fucking lemmy comments. Disgusting.
- [object Object]@lemmy.caEnglish7 days
Same thing just happened with Anthropics numbers. Billions short of their stated numbers.
It’s an LLM adbot, or, at best, someone having LLM craft all of their comments and posts.
The accounts profile heavily advertises services for LLM adbots covertly advertising to people using social media.
- schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 days
Search is garbage now, but I’d bet even money he is lifting text directly from House of El–or they have a common source.
- wols@lemmy.zipEnglish7 days
I’ve felt for a while that House of El uses LLMs heavily in their scripts. It’s a pandemic on YouTube feels like.
So yeah, the common source is likely clanker speak.
- RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zipEnglish6 days
I desire the collapse so much.
I own nothing of value, I lose nothing.
Good piece of financial advice. You’re assets can’t lose value if you have none ;)
- bluefootedbooby@sopuli.xyzEnglish6 days
As a person with assets, I will gladly watch them burn together with AI. Can we be done with this tomfoolery already please.
- wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish6 days
Just invest in the things that we actually need. Renewables for example.
Shenanigans, poppycockery, cockamamie, and a basic lack of respect for the institutions god damn it, I ain’t having it!
I am with you the whole way, friend. I love seeing the stock market crash. Brings them all down closer to our daily level.
- abc@suppo.fiEnglish6 days
So you selfishly want others to fail and yourself to thrive. That’s an honest position, but perhaps not very ethical. Incidentally almost exactly the same position the billionaires take.
- Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish7 days
Basically, the AI lab told backers to expect revenues approaching $50 billion — far shorter than the explosive $70 billion number reported previously.
Though that $70 billion figure was also based on leaked investor memos, OpenAI wasn’t in any hurry to deny it, digging itself into a $20 billion hole.
So they told investors they’d make $70b and now they’re bringing down the forecast to $50b . $50b is still insane, that’s more revenue then any other software company except Microsoft (and probably anthropic), next closest is Salesforce with $41b, and Salesforce built that revenue over decades. Open AI finished 2025 with $13b in revenue, that’s nearly 4x growth in a year on more then 10 billion in revenue, that has never been done before.
Idk if this is a sign of a bubble collapsing just because it’s record setting growth and revenue aren’t as explosive as they initially said. It is still very much explosive, but more a fission bomb then an h bomb. It seems the market agrees, Nvidia is down ~1% on this news, but still up 5% on this month and 20% yoy.
- skibidi@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
50B is annualized revenue, accrued revenue will be almost certainly be quite a bit lower this year.
Tech companies love reporting ARR because it is always bigger than GAAP revenue (if the business is growing at all).
- likebudda@reddthat.comEnglish6 days
It’s not annualized in the traditional sense. They take their highest revenue day and multiply it by 365.
- KaiFeng@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
That… Doesn’t make sense does it? Like apart from fraud what’s the point of doing it like that?
- CrimeIsLegalNow@ani.socialEnglish6 days
Oh, it’s absolutely a fraud meant to deceive investors.
Just not legally speaking.
- redballooon@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
But the $70b number was published by an investor, and OpenAIs crime was to not disagree publicly. Makes me wonder who is frauding whom.
I won’t pretend to understand this news.
- eestileib@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 days
We don’t even know their calculation. It’s just a number they present without context.
- Lumisal@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
“revenue” that’s propped up by the government and ignores other factors, such as overall expenses, competing open source models, and non-realized assets.
The difference between Microsoft and OpenAI or Anthropic is that Microsoft has a profit model.
There’s absolutely no way that the big LLM companies can make enough profit to overcome their expenses in the next decade even, especially since the technology on the open front only continues to improve. That’s why the LLM bros keep hyping it up via fear mongering and criminal activities like hacking - to keep selling the illusion that it’s AI.
yeah $20 imaginary dollerydoos were shaved off the $70 anticipated imaginary dollerydoos, it’s all so idiotic
- humanspiral@lemmy.caEnglish6 days
The bubble part is the extremely high losses, even before hiding training expenses as assets that become worthless the next month after a new version release. Also monumental promises that they will require massive new fundraising for, that fewer people understand remain possibly sustainable.
- Passerby6497@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Idk if this is a sign of a bubble collapsing just because it’s record setting growth and revenue aren’t as crazy as they initially said.
That’s because you’re thinking about the situation rationally, which isn’t something the market is known for.
- Tollana1234567@lemmy.todayEnglish6 days
its basically elizabeth holmes, but with AI, and with the same freaky facial expression.
- Gates9@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 days
The company I work does pretty basic analysis. Its certainly an “every day” application. It’s been two or three years they’ve been Investing large amounts of money into this, and it can’t do shit. We have been “training” it for faaaaaar longer than it would take to train a human to do these things. Plus, they’ve torn it apart and completely restarted the process at least twice, to my knowledge. Zero efficiencies, very little practical capability. I hear that it’s great at coding and math, I’ve seen it do word processing pretty good, but these assholes oversold it’s capabilities to the managerial class, and they fucking took it. Hook, line, and sinker.
- moustachio@lemmy.worldEnglish5 days
It’s not even that good at coding. It has to be heavily curated and focused to output somewhat “correct” code, it is full of gaps that lead to lots of bugs and missed scopes that a human would bring up if they wrote it themselves, and the output is incredibly verbose and inefficient (and harder for engineers to read).
It’s subpar at everything, there are no areas it shines.
Since I haven’t seen it yet in this conversation, I think I need to bring some better context to what this article is claiming.
No, OpenAI did not assume they were making $70 billion. They’ve always known their existing number. In fact, that number IS what was reported to investors.
The $70 billion number is coming from a specific investor that wanted to adjust the definition of revenue to get a more “apples to apples” comparison to Anthropic’s numbers.
When these companies license their models to hypervisors (AWS, Azure, etc), those hypervisors take a cut. OpenAI does not report that cut as revenue. This investor wanted to add it back in to get a “total demand for AI tokens” number.
They are 2 completely different metrics coming from 2 completely different groups.
Are you suggesting that The End is not, in fact, Near? And OpenAI is not about to collapse into bankruptcy, ending the entire AI ecosystem?
Maybe I’ll go out on a limb and say this specific piece of news is not indication of the AI apocalypse. There are still plenty of things to be skeptical of long term, but this itself is not an indication of an inevitable crash.
- 6 days
I wish more people realized AI is not going any where any time soon, regardless of their feelings on it.
- distante@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
Is not about AI going away, is about the huge economic problem the current bubble will cause.
- kestrel7_7@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
I agree, it truly is going nowhere. This tech is exactly as useless and uninspiring as it’s always been.
- NotAnOtter@lemmus.orgEnglish6 days
The fundamentals get worse and worse the closer you look.
Like for example, so much of their opex is filed under capex. Graphic cards & related assets degrade over time but are often listed as one time purchases, compute time is often evaluated as one time expenses but the models need to be retrained to improve over time, etc.
- Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.caEnglish6 days
I believe the implosion of the AI bubble will essentially torpedo the only thing still supporting the US economy?
- krisevol@lemmus.orgEnglish6 days
Yes. When the bubble finally pops it means AI is here to stay and the remaining companies will probably climb 100x over the next two decades, but all the people currently invested will lose almost everything. The people not invested will still feel the effect as the layoffs and bankruptcies start rolling out, and anyone pension or retirement that is tied to bubble will lose a lot of value.
This will come right as the bond market is reaching the point of no return, and the US won’t be able to pay back the debt. A lot of people are going to lose everything, including their retirements during the debt liquidation that is coming.
- moustachio@lemmy.worldEnglish5 days
AI will “stay” in what form? Local models? The companies selling it are almost certainly going to lose their over 100 lawsuits of copyright infringement they’re 100% guilty of. I’m sure local models will be utilized, but not these LLM snake oil salesman’s products anymore.
- krisevol@lemmus.orgEnglish5 days
AI will be in everything you do. The companies that remain after the Bible pops will become the largest companies in America.
