95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Finds
Submitted 1 day ago by kalkulat@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
NatakuNox@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
The first problem is the name. It’s NOT artificial intelligence, it’s artificial stupidity.
People BOUGHT intelligence but GOT stupidity.
krigo666@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Artificial Imbecility
dan1101@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s a search engine with a natural language interface.
A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 1 day ago
An unreliable search engine that lies
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 14 hours ago
the ceo and csuites did, they hyped all up and was excited for its innovation.
tburkhol@lemmy.world 1 day ago
People will accept either intelligence or stupidity. They will pay for a flattering sycophant.
ricecake@sh.itjust.works 19 hours ago
It’s frustrating because they used the technical term in a knowingly misleading way.
LLMs are artificial intelligence in the same way that a washing machines load and soil tuning systems are. Which is to say they are intelligent, but so are ants, earthworms, and slime molds. The detect stimuli, and react based on that stimuli.
They market it as though “artificial intelligence” means “super human reasoning”, “very smart”, or “capable of thought” when it’s really a combination of “reacts to stimuli in a meaningful fashion” and “can appear intelligent”.
SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
Oh, that reminds me that we’ve always lived in false bubbles, and when they burst, crises and other things started, and eventually the biggest bubble that we call civilization and progress will burst, maybe in 2040-2050+.
vk6flab@lemmy.radio 21 hours ago
It’s also making people deskill.
Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org 1 day ago
snf@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
Where is the MIT study in question? The link in the paper, apparently to a PDF, redirects elsewhere
vegyk0z6@lemmy.ml 23 hours ago
Seems to be behind a Google form?
MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 23 hours ago
Apparently you have to give your data to get the reports.
snf@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Well fuck that
fubarx@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Wonder if the 5% that actually made money included companies that sell enterprise AI services, like AWS, Microsoft, and Google?
Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 hours ago
Nvidia?
BillDaCatt@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I have no proof, but I feel like the AI push and Turnip getting re-elected and his regression of the EPA rules sounds like this whole thing was an excuse to burn more fossil fuels.
If I was invested in AI, and considering AI’s thirst for electricity, I would absolutely make a similar investment in energy. That way, as the AI server farms suck up the electricity I would get at least some of that money back from the energy market.
JATtho@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
Every technology invented is a dual edge sword. Other edge propulses deluge of misinformation, llm hallucinations, brain washing of the masses, and exploit exploit for profit. The better side advances progress in science, well being, availbility of useful knowledge. Like the nuclerbomb, LLM “ai” is currenty in its infancy and is used as a weapon, there is a literal race to who makes the “biggest best” fkn “AI” to dominate the world. Eventually, the over optimistic buble bursts and reality of the flaws and risks will kick in. (Hopefully…)
RUN_DMG@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
But surely the next 30 billion they are going to burn will get it right!
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I think there are real productivity gains to be had but the vast majority are probably leaning into the idea of replacing people too much. It helps me do my job but I’m still the decision maker and I need to review the outputs. I’m still accountable for what AI gives me so I’m not willing to blindly pass that stuff forward.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 hours ago
Yeah. The dunning kruger effect is a real problem here.
I saw a meme saying something like, gen AI is a real expert in everything but completely clueless about my area of specialisation.
As in… it generates plausible answers that seem great but they’re just terrible answers.
I’m a consultant I’m in a legal adjacent field. 20 years deep. I’ve been using a model from hugging face over the last few months.
It can save me time by generating a lot of boiler plate with references et cetera. However it very regularly overlooks critically important components. If I didnt know about these things then I wouldn’t know it was missing from the answer.
So really, it cant help you be more knowledgeable, it can only support you at your existing level.
Additionally, for complex / very specific questions, it’s just a confidently incorrect failure. It sucks that it cant tell you how confident it is with a given answer.
Bebopalouie@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
goatinspace@feddit.org 1 day ago
vane@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
It’s not about return it’s about addiction.
someguy3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
We’re now at the “if you don’t, your competitor will”. So you really have no choice. There are people that don’t use Google anymore and just use chatgpt for all questions.
arin@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Losing money is a called going into debt, not just zero returns.
absquatulate@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Does abybody have the original study? I tried to find it but the link is dead ( looks like NANDA pulled it )
andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 22 hours ago
Return? /s
doingthestuff@lemy.lol 1 day ago
Douse it with gasoline. Burn it with fire.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 23 hours ago
AI Spend,
It’s okay to say [spending] when the OOP forgets how to English, right?
surph_ninja@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Emerging technology always loses money in the first few years. Sometimes for a decade or so. This isn’t new.
ilinamorato@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
AI isn’t “emerging.” The industry is new, but we’ve had neural networks for decades. They’ve been regularly in use for things like autocorrect and image classification since before the iPhone. Google upgraded Google Translate to use a GPT in 2016 (9 years ago). What’s “emerging” now is just marketing and branding, and trying to shove it into form factors and workloads that it’s not well suited to. Maybe some slightly quicker iteration due to the unreasonable amount of money being thrown at it.
It’s kind of like if a band made a huge deal out of their new album and the crazy new sound it had, but then you listened to it and it was just, like…disco? And disco is fine, but…by itself it’s definitely not anything to write home about in 2025. And then a whole bunch of other bands were like, “yeah, we do disco too!” And some of them were ok at it, and most were definitely not, but they were all trying to fit disco into songs that really shouldn’t have been disco. And every time someone was like, “I kinda don’t want to listen to disco right now,” a band manager said “shut up yes you do.”
surph_ninja@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
If you really want to be reductionist, it’s just electricity being fed through silicon. Everything is. Just 1’s and 0’s repackaged over & over!
But it shows a significant lack of insight and understanding. Guess you can make a ton of money with puts on all these companies, with that kinda confidence.