Live data from Hacker News

The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

hachyderm.io

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#71

People have short memories. A few years ago hypes like big data and machine learning, blockchain and autonomous cars were pushed relentlessly . The consultants would confidently predict 300 gazillion profits by 2030, everybody would lose their job etc. Then the pandemic happened, momentarily some candid voices admitted that all this digi-crap does not help an iota with our quality of life (or life, period) but the di…

> The tech economy is like the fabled sharks: needs to keep inventing hypes or it will implode No, the tech economy wouldn't implode. It would just signal it had become an old, stable industry (eg automobiles). The so called tech economy isn't going away under any scenario, it underpins modern civilization across the globe, and that's only going to be more true in 20/30/50 years than it is already today. The tech eco…

> Should take a person less than a minute to grasp this

Well, we need to calibrate a baseline otherwise its just a waste of my precious minute. Digital tech as such, especially the hardware side is not a fluke. It evolves inexorably in capability, follows physical laws (e.g. the endless shrinking of transistor sizes has stopped) and is the tooling supporting a range of potentially long-term sustainable economic activities.

This reality does not exactly fix the relative size of the tech economy to the rest of the economy, much less so in terms of market valuation (which is the driver for most the actors involved).

There are various important factors that people simply assume are "normal" in the tech landscape but they are not. They are the result of arbitrary political decisions. 1) The degree of allowed concentration (monopolization) that essentially guarantees rent extraction and prohibits commoditization. 2) Lax attitudes towards data privacy that effectively simply siphon wealth from others. These two regulatory malfuctions could be reversed without much impact on the actual tech but a major impact on valuations.

In fact the engineered hypes serve as much the need to keep inquiring minds at bay (by arguing now is not the time to stifle the exponential innovation) as they do to inflate stock options.

Finally you have the fact that a certain fraction of "tech" is essentially disemboweling and substituting (rather than growing) other industries. For each triumphant Amazon type entity (that you seem to celebrate so much), you have the millions of boarded-up city bookstores and shops. This is a more complicated economic calculus. You could argue that all those vendors, publishers, taxi drivers, hoteliers etc should have been more proactive in adopting technology rather than have their lunch eaten.

I would like to reverse the compliment and argue that it should take a person of any awareness less than a minute to grasp the rotten foundations on which quite a bit of the "tech economy" has built its edifice.

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#72
post #8

AI is a marketing term. The people using it are marketing something. You would never use the term in a technical description because it's too ambiguous. Everything he's describing: Companies showing off to investors, devs showing off to management is about marketing.

Yeah for real. Saw a post on HN yesterday I think with the title something like "Development we call it machine learning, in advertisements it's called AI" or something to that end

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#73
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember the name of the company, but they sponsor CPR(Colorado-area NPR affiliate), but they went from being "an IoT company", to "an IoT blockchain company", to an "IoT blockchain with AI" company.

C3 IOT I'm guessing

This is the one. C3 IOT became C3 AI without batting a lash. The radio copy is almost identical, with only the name change to catch your ear or avoid sounding dated.

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#74
post #40

People have short memories. A few years ago hypes like big data and machine learning, blockchain and autonomous cars were pushed relentlessly . The consultants would confidently predict 300 gazillion profits by 2030, everybody would lose their job etc. Then the pandemic happened, momentarily some candid voices admitted that all this digi-crap does not help an iota with our quality of life (or life, period) but the di…

I think you got your timeline a bit mixed up. the EV and blockchain craze happened during and BECAUSE of the pandemic. It was the rise of inflation that brought everything down starting in February of 2021. (yes, blockchain had a previous bubble, but that ended in 2018). This is why bitcoin and the nasdaq both peaked in December 2021. But those EV spacs were already in a world of hurt since Feb.

Nah, the hype cycle for both started a decade ago, long before the pandemic.

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#75
post #64
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> VR is stuck because the headgear remains clunky It could be stuck for more than one reason. I would find VR repugnant even if it were as easy to wear as a contact lens.

That may be a generational thing. There are "VR natives". See Phia's Virtual Reality Show.[1] There was a time when people didn't walk around with little screens in their hand. There was a time when only women used keyboards. [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMMBpWfWUd3xlcOxrot_neA

Agreed. My own personal trajectory was

1. raised without Internet

2. discovered internet and thought it would transform the world for good

3. discovered mobile devices and thought they would transform the world for good

4. discovered social medial and thought it would transform the world for good

5. deeply disillusioned with social media and abandon it

6. think social media festering cancer

7. think mobile device cuts me off from most meaningful social contact

8. abandoned mobile device (but kept Apple Watch for emergencies)

I'm curious to know if future generations who started at #4 end up at the same place I did.

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#76
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The labor market is USD$144 trillion worldwide in salary. Automate a fraction of a percentage of the worldwide labor? You have a company with more annual revenue than Apple. What makes you think that AI/LLM tech is going to result in a single winner? That revenue might be split between a few hundred thousand companies. Unlike the product from the current tech giants, there is no network effect AI stacks, there is n…

> That revenue might be split between a few hundred thousand companies. That’s not how power laws work. Over time, many niches will be created but usually it starts with one big winner taking it all. For example, first there where many half baked solutions, then there was Netflix and now we have all kinds of streaming providers, many of which are trying to find a niche such as Apple-owners or Disney fans. Similarly,…

> Over time, many niches will be created but usually it starts with one big winner taking it all.

Usually, yes. But in this case it appeared to have started with multiple small providers, with multiple non-half-baked services. There doesn't appear to be a moat for anyone in this market.

Unlike streaming video (Netflix, et al) which has a moat (exclusive content), or social media (network effects), or ad industry (eyeballs).

With AI there is no moat that I can think of (quite happy to be provided with potential counter-examples, even if they are only hypothetical).

Let me try a different way to explain it: If you're building an ad network, a social media service, a SaaS dev-product provider, a video streaming service, etc, you will be unable to convince users to switch just by having a better product. The moat will keep them on the worse product (eyeballs, network effect, legacy support, exclusive content respecitively) no matter what you do.

With AI, there is no moat that I can think of - if you were to start an AI product today, what is the AI-specific moat you can use to keep out future competitors? Legislation, maybe?

I'm not sure that iPhones are a good example. It's a product, not a service. By definition there's no moat.

Re: The real engine behind "AI" is the bad tech economy

#77
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That revenue might be split between a few hundred thousand companies. That’s not how power laws work. Over time, many niches will be created but usually it starts with one big winner taking it all. For example, first there where many half baked solutions, then there was Netflix and now we have all kinds of streaming providers, many of which are trying to find a niche such as Apple-owners or Disney fans. Similarly,…

> Over time, many niches will be created but usually it starts with one big winner taking it all. Usually, yes. But in this case it appeared to have started with multiple small providers, with multiple non-half-baked services. There doesn't appear to be a moat for anyone in this market. Unlike streaming video (Netflix, et al) which has a moat (exclusive content), or social media (network effects), or ad industry (eye…

> With AI there is no moat that I can think of

I was also thinking about that yes. I think it’s mostly data (a sort of network effect), capex, and state-of-the-art engineering/research. A bit like TSMC and ASML. Also heavy capex and engineering moats.

Post reply on HN