Live data from Hacker News

AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

bloomberg.com

21–30 of 121 posts

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#21
post #15

How big is $344B? Apparently the total market capitalisation of the US stock market is $62.8 trillion. Shiller's CAPE ratio for the S & P index is currently about 38 -- CAPE is defined as current price / (earnings, averaged over the trailing 10 years) That suggests that over the last 10 years, the average earnings of the US stock market is about $1.7 trillion annually. So $344B of spending is about 1/5 of the average…

But the $344B figure is not annualized, it’s cumulative.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#22
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no error bars, no confidence intervals. Just a one trick pony that pastes tokens together to give you something that may look good to many people. Sure there are many good use cases, but there are still enough non-patchable and indeterminable in size holes in the watering pail to limit its effectiveness.

Are you saying the Internet is a fad?

Just like those newfangled computer thingamadjigies. Overhyped, no long term value.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#23
post #12

What's the path to recouping that money? Even if every major company in the US spends $100,000 a year on subscriptions and every household spends $20/month, it still doesn't seem like enough return on investment when you factor in inference costs and all the other overhead. New medical discoveries, maybe? I saw OpenAI's announcement about gpt-bio and iPSCs which was pretty amazing, but there's a very long gap between…

Wasn't the plan AGI, not ROI on offering services based on current gen AI models. AGI was the winner takes all holy grail, so all this money was just buying lottery tickets in hopes of striking AGI first. At least that how I remember it, but AGI dreams may have been hampered by lack of exponential improvement in last year.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#24
post #12

What's the path to recouping that money? Even if every major company in the US spends $100,000 a year on subscriptions and every household spends $20/month, it still doesn't seem like enough return on investment when you factor in inference costs and all the other overhead. New medical discoveries, maybe? I saw OpenAI's announcement about gpt-bio and iPSCs which was pretty amazing, but there's a very long gap between…

I think it's "scam everyone into giving us lots of money, then run before the bills come".

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#25
post #12

What's the path to recouping that money? Even if every major company in the US spends $100,000 a year on subscriptions and every household spends $20/month, it still doesn't seem like enough return on investment when you factor in inference costs and all the other overhead. New medical discoveries, maybe? I saw OpenAI's announcement about gpt-bio and iPSCs which was pretty amazing, but there's a very long gap between…

$100k/year is literally nothing.

Think of it as maybe $10k/employee, figuring a conservative 10% boost in productivity against a lowball $100k/year fully burdened salary+benefits. For a company with 10,000 employees that’s $100m/year.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#26
post #21
post #15

How big is $344B? Apparently the total market capitalisation of the US stock market is $62.8 trillion. Shiller's CAPE ratio for the S & P index is currently about 38 -- CAPE is defined as current price / (earnings, averaged over the trailing 10 years) That suggests that over the last 10 years, the average earnings of the US stock market is about $1.7 trillion annually. So $344B of spending is about 1/5 of the average…

But the $344B figure is not annualized, it’s cumulative.

[deleted]

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#27
post #19
post #12

What's the path to recouping that money? Even if every major company in the US spends $100,000 a year on subscriptions and every household spends $20/month, it still doesn't seem like enough return on investment when you factor in inference costs and all the other overhead. New medical discoveries, maybe? I saw OpenAI's announcement about gpt-bio and iPSCs which was pretty amazing, but there's a very long gap between…

If LLMs could double the efficiency of white collar workers, major companies would be asked for far more than $100,000 a year. If could cut their expensive workforce in half and then paid even 25% of their savings it could easily generate enough revenue to make that valuation look cheap.

Unfortunately for the LLM vendors, that's not what we're seeing. I guess that used to be the plan, and now they're just scrambling around for whatever they can manage before it all falls apart.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#28
post #7
post #4

This technology demos incredibly well and you can just see how everyone gets giddy with excitement around using it. I watch my colleagues and executives proud to show what they could do or make endless jokes about it. It reminds me of when people first got their phones and couldn't stop showing everyone how cool they were. This leads to an over rotation in the perceived value.. the value is significant just as the mo…

>> in anonymous forums there's a lot more people pointing out that they think this is hype whereas when we wear our professional hats many of us join in When your boss is hyping it up and demanding all hands on deck full steam ahead on the Good Ship AI, lots of people join in out of fear, particularly in the currently awful job market which is partly being ruined by AI itself. Some of us just stay quiet, keep our hea…

No developer job has yet been lost to AI. We are in a huge recession, and companies like to have an excuse to fire people that can be spun as a positive.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#29
post #23
post #12

What's the path to recouping that money? Even if every major company in the US spends $100,000 a year on subscriptions and every household spends $20/month, it still doesn't seem like enough return on investment when you factor in inference costs and all the other overhead. New medical discoveries, maybe? I saw OpenAI's announcement about gpt-bio and iPSCs which was pretty amazing, but there's a very long gap between…

Wasn't the plan AGI, not ROI on offering services based on current gen AI models. AGI was the winner takes all holy grail, so all this money was just buying lottery tickets in hopes of striking AGI first. At least that how I remember it, but AGI dreams may have been hampered by lack of exponential improvement in last year.

I’m sure somebody believed that? But I never met them.

Re: AI's $344B 'language model' bet looks fragile

#30
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no error bars, no confidence intervals. Just a one trick pony that pastes tokens together to give you something that may look good to many people. Sure there are many good use cases, but there are still enough non-patchable and indeterminable in size holes in the watering pail to limit its effectiveness.

Are you saying the Internet is a fad?

Yes
Post reply on HN