Live data from Hacker News

95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

thedailyadda.com

71–80 of 445 posts

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#71

Why do people so desperately want to see AI fail?

I think people want to see the mindless application of crappy LLM chatbots and AI summaries everywhere fail. At least that's my position. I would also like the notion that "development can be sped up 6-700% by applying AI" would go away.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#72
post #46
post #12

This is why it's so good to sell shovels, so-to-speak. In this case, that's NVDA

The shovel business is good as long as the gold rush lasts. Once the gold rush is over, you're going to have to deal with a significant decrease in volume, unless you can find other customers. Crypto's over, gaming isn't a large enough market to fill the hole, the only customers that could fill the demand would be military projects. Considering the arms race with China, and the many military applications of AI, that…

There aren’t enough GPUs for average gamers to buy anything vaguely recent and they would love to be able to. Making the best GPUs on the planet is still huge and the market is quite large. Scalping might finally die at this rate, but NVDA wasn’t making any of the scalping money anyway so who cares? Data centers and gamers still need every GPU NVDA can make.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#73
post #16

We are entering the “Trough of disillusionment.” These hype cycles are very predictable. GPT-5 being panned as a disappointment after endless hype may go down as GenAI’s “jump the shark” moment. It’s all fun and games until the bean counters start asking for evidence of return on investment. GenAI folks better buckle up. Bumps ahead. The smart folks are already quietly preparing for a shift to ride the next hype wave…

Prepare for the crash:

"Spending on AI data centers is so massive that it’s taken a bigger chunk of GDP growth than shopping" - https://fortune.com/2025/08/06/data-center-artificial-intell...

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#74
post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

At work we've tried AI summaries for meetings, but we spent so much time fixing those summaries that we started writing our own again.

Is there some training you applied or something specific to your use case that makes it work for you?

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#75

This is how America ends up being ahead of the rest of world with every new technology breakthrough. They spend a lot of money, lose a lot of money, take risks, and then end up being too far for others to catch up. Trying to claim victory against AI/US Companies this early is a dangerous move.

> This is how America ends up being ahead of the rest of world with every new technology breakthrough. Too young to remember GSM?

I don't think its controversial to say that in net, the US has had a good streak so far with new technologies. Yeah there have been some pretty big misses, but obviously the wins more than make up for them.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#76

What are the actual use cases that can generate revenue or at least save costs today? I can think of: 1. Generate content to create online influence. This is at this point probably way oversaturated and I think more sophisticated models will not make it better. 2. Replace junior developers with Claude Code or similar. Only sort of works. After all, you can only babysit one of these at a time no matter how senior you…

I am working on a project that uses LLM to pull certain pieces of information from semi-structured documents and then categorize/file them under the correct account. it's about 95% accurate and we haven't even begun to fine tune it. i expect it will require human in the loop checks for the foreseeable future, but even with a human approval of each item, its going to save the clerical staff hundreds of hours per year. There are a lot of opportunities in automating/semi-automating processes like this, basically just information extraction and categorization tasks.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#77
post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

How can you double-check the work? Also, what happens when the AI transcription is wrong in a way that would have terminated the employee. You can't fire a model.

Finally, who cares about millions saved (while considering the above introduced risk), when trillions are on the line?

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#79
post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

You could do that offline 20 years ago with Dragon Naturally Speaking and a one-time licence.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#80
post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

This makes sense. AI is obviously useful for many things. But people wouldn't invest tens of billions to summarize data center calls and similar tasks. Replacing data center workers isnt where the money is - it's replacing 100K-200K/year workers.
Post reply on HN