Comment on 95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Finds

ushmel@piefed.world ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

• veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Tech CEOs really should be replaced with AI, since they all behave like the seagulls from Finding Nemo and just follow the trends set out by whatever bs Elon starts

  source

  • _stranger_@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    If I pinged my CEO over Slack and got back “You’re absolutely right! Let me try that again” I might actually die from crying with joy.

    source
  • explodicle@sh.itjust.works ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    If only there was some group of people with detailed knowledge of the company, who would be informed enough to steer its direction wisely. /s

    source
• vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Suppose many of the CEOs are just milking general venture capital. And those CEOs know that it’s a bubble and it’ll burst, but have a good enough way to predict when it will, thus leaving with profit. I mean, anyway, CEOs are usually not reliant upon company’s performance, so no need even to know.

  Also suppose that some very good source of free\cheap computation is used for the initial hype - like, a conspiracy theory, a backdoor in most popular TCP/IP realizations making all of the Internet’s major routers work as a VM for some limited bytecode for someone who knows about that backdoor and controls two machines, talking to each other via the Internet and directly.

  Then the blockchain bubble and the AI bubble would be similar in relying upon such computation (convenient for something slow in latency but endlessly parallel), and those inflating the bubbles and knowing of such a backdoor wouldn’t risk anything, and would clear the field of plenty of competition with each iteration, making fortunes via hedge funds. They would spend very little for the initial stage of mining the initial party of bitcoins (what if Satoshi were actually Bill Joy or someone like that, who could have put such a backdoor, in theory), and training the initial stages of superficially impressive LLMs.

  And then all this perpetual process of bubble after bubble makes some group of people (narrow enough, if they can keep the secret constituting my conspiracy theory) richer and richer quick enough on the planetary scale to gradually own bigger and bigger percent of the world economy, indirectly, of course, while regularly cleaning the field of clueless normies.

  Just a conspiracy theory, don’t treat it too seriously. But if, suppose, this were true, it would be both cartoonishly evil and cinematographically epic.

  source

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Honestly I think another part is that AI is actually pretty fascinating (or at least easy to make seem fascinating to investors lol) so when company A makes a flashy statement to investors involving AI, company B’s investors ask why company B isn’t utilizing this amazing new technology. This plays into that aspect of not wanting to get left behind.

    source

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Yes, people grew with subconscious feeling that cautionary tales of the old science fiction are the way to real power. A bit similar to ex-Soviet people being subconsciously attracted to German Nazi symbolism.

      Evil is usually shown as strong, and strength is what we need IRL, to make a successful business, to fix a decaying nation, to give a depressed society something to be enthusiastic about.

      They think there should be some future, looking, eh, futuristic.

      The most futuristic things are those that look and function in a practical way and change people’s lives for the better. We’ve had the brilliance and entertainment of 90s and early 00s computing, then it became worse. So they have to promise something.

      BTW, in architecture brutalism is coming back into fashion (in discussions and not in the real construction), perhaps we will see a similar movement for computing at some point - for simplification and egalitarianism.

      source