Comment

Comment on What makes LLMs interesting to investors is not so much their usefulness, but the fact that the technology goes very well with the "just believe in me" approach.

Canconda@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

I think everyone banking on the AI bubble bursting and that being the end of AI slop are going to be very, very, disappointed with what is about to happen.

AI is going to keep getting better at things. The existence of AI slop or trash vibe coding has no bearing on future capabilities of these models.
The AI “bubble” is less of a bubble and more of a ball and cup game exchanging real assets. So while the redundancy in stock market valuations is fluff… the data centers, energy production, and computer chips are not. Those things will still exist after any bubble bursts.
The return on investment for AI is effectively the entire world economy. Their goal with AI is to entirely eliminate the need to pay human labourers. Whoever owns that AI will defacto become the most profitable & powerful entity in the fucking world.
AI will transform warfare and violence on levels on comparable with the invention of projectile weapons and gunpowder. When the AI bubble bursts the Military-Industrial-Complex will simply buy the dip.

I really don’t like AI… but we can’t afford to turn our brains off at “AI Slop” and not think realistically about what’s coming next.

source

Sort:hotnew top

kbal@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Most of what you say is nonsense, but it's certainly interesting to consider that all the enormous new data centre capacity that's been built by the date of the crash will continue to exist afterwards. I wonder what we'll do with it all.

source
- Canconda@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  
  Most of what you say is nonsense,
  
  Refute it then. Cuz right now you’re just displaying the brain off behaviour I was describing.
  
  source
  - kbal@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    "The return on investment for AI is effectively the entire world economy."
    
    Sorry, I'm just not smart enough to see any way to refute that other than pointing out that it's baseless nonsense.
    
    source
    Canconda@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    So you’re not concerned about general purpose humanoid robots being used to replace human workforces entirely?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- IronBird@lemmy.world ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  same thing they were doing with it before…trying to corner various shitcoins
  
  source
DandomRude@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Do you have any sources that cite figures that would suggest this? To be honest, I have my doubts—except for the statement that money is being shifted back and forth; however, I don’t understand why massive investments in data centers would make sense in this context if it’s not just making a profit for Nvidia and such.

As I said, I don’t consider LLMs and image generation to be technologies without use cases. I’m simply saying that the impact of these technologies is being significantly and very deliberately overestimated. Take so-called AI agents, for example: they’re a practical thing, but miles away from how they’re being sold.

Furthermore, even Open AI is very far from being in the black, and I consider it highly doubtful that this will ever be possible given the considerable costs involved. In my opinion, the only option would be to focus on marketing opportunities, which is the business model of the classic Google search engine—but this would have a very negative impact on user value.

source
- Canconda@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  So you gotta understand, I’m a history buff with a financial background that dabbles in cybersecurity. So like this is me speculating based on my own view.
  
  Do you have any sources that cite figures that would suggest this? To be honest, I have my doubts
  
  Can you be more specific? I want to give you a high quality response when I have time.
  
  source
  - DandomRude@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Thank you, I really appreciate that.
    
    Figures and/or examples would be very interesting for:
    
    The statement that LLMs will continue to develop rapidly and/or that their output will improve in quality. I currently assume that development will slow down considerably—for example, with regard to hallucinations, where it was assumed for some time that the problem could be solved by more extensive training data, but this has proven to be a dead end.
    
    The statement that the value of the companies involved can be justified in any way with real-world assets. Or, at any rate, reliable statements about how existing or planned data centers built for this purpose can be operated economically despite their considerable running costs.
    
    How you justify your statement that it would be realistic to replace human workers on a large scale. Examples where this is the case would be interesting (by this I don’t mean figures on where workers have been laid off, but examples of companies where human work has been (successfully) made obsolete by LLMs – I am not aware of any such examples where this has happened in a significant way and attributable to the use of LLMs.
    
    I am aware that the technology is being used in warfare. I am not aware of its significance or the tactical advantages it is supposed to offer. Please provide examples of what you mean.
    
    source
HopeOfTheGunblade@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
It is not obvious that LLMs are ever going to be much more than they are now, and a major change in architecture is going to take a long time to get up to this level, especially as all the money chases LLMs and the video cards let the magic smoke out day by day.

I agree that AI is going to eat the world and people really do have no understanding of the ground shaking under their feet. “Tomorrow will be basically like today, but with bigger TVs,” is a strong bias to be pushing against. But that all said, that does not mean that LLMs are it. It is entirely possible that their cap is slop and no higher.

source