Live data from Hacker News

America is now one big bet on AI

ft.com

151–160 of 193 posts

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#151
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is a little frustrating how we as a society have just decided that corporations don’t need to make money Making money was already a problem, what we should strive for is creating value. You can make big bucks selling cigarettes, leaded gas or PFAS riddled products... the money is made but you're still a net negative for society

I don’t disagree with anything you said but it’s kind of a whataboutism. Cigarettes and leaded gas are bad and a net negative on the world, but they aren’t Ponzi schemes in the same way that so many tech companies are.

Yes. Revenue is a proxy for value created in the economy. Profit is a proxy for value created for the owners (equity shareholders).

Thats it.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#152
post #125
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be so sure, especially since we know a lot of it is actually vendor financing/circular financing (Nvidia give money to OpenAI who buy dedicated datacenter from oracle who buy GPUs from Nvidia), so a part of the growth might have to be counted twice, or more.

Wouldn't that just mean it's less of the actual GDP growth? Either way if it's only 40% of the calculated figure double counted or not I have a hard time seeing how the secondary effects would account for the remaining 60% too, which would be 150% of the original first order effects.

Market confidence in growth is a second-order effect. Non-AI investments would decrease markedly if growth is stalling.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Option 3, nothing changes: people (and institutions) still have income they need to put /somewhere/, and continue putting it in 401ks and index funds because that's the system. Stonks continue to go up, completely unmoored from any behavior in the actual world.

That sounds a lot like the "everyone has to live somewhere and historically house prices never decrease" argument circa 2006-2007. Equities are not the only asset class in existence and in any market people can sell just as easily as they can buy. Not to mention, in addition to the GFC, it took the stock market until 1954 to recover the 1929 highs and in Japan it took until 2024 to recover from the 1989 crash, so the…

... and let me recommend this blog post about how the housing bubble was exaggerated, and it the bubble is real, the money manifesting as demand for housing is really there (of course coming from the economic growth and brutal amounts of wealth transfer from will-be-owners to was-owners)

https://www.fullstackeconomics.com/p/the-2000s-housing-bubbl...

housing related supply-side problems are simply very hard to address whereas everybody and their dog is pumping money into the market (cheap loans to help families, singles, poor people, cheap loans to developers, and anyone who wants, because it's low risk anyway, and companies are doing CoL adjustments, and then there are spillover effects from big metro areas, and foreign investors ...)

and US population was growing, and construction starts were and are still low (historically but compared to the "pent up" demand)

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST

of course the problem is that simply pouring money into housing without transportation infrastructure just leads to even more problems, so it's really a problems bubble! (always has been.)

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that totally discards the comment I was responding to. Needless to say, I don't agree with your definition or your idea that it's solved.

It partially addresses it, specifically addresses one part but not the other. "Value" to the individual is subjective, and defined by the price people are willing and able to pay. Its "solved" in the sense that modern economics universally accepts it. The harder part are the second order effects / negative externalities (e.g. cancer from cigarettes). But it’s a constant balancing act between over- and under-regulatio…

Personally, I don't really see the point of coming into a thread while completely disregarding the context.

The OP I was replying to brings the notion that money and value aren't the same thing. If someone disagrees with that premise, then maybe they should reply to OP.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#155
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do people actually buy into the absurdity of humanoid robots and robotaxis? Have you ever taken a Waymo? You see them on every street in SF now.

> Have you ever taken a Waymo? You see them on every street in SF now Man I can tell you 99.9999% of people in real life outside of silicon valley tech hubs do not give a single shit about these things. City dwellers are already so disconnected from reality, but silicon valley takes it to a whole other level. Only terminally online tech solutionists get a hard on for these things

I live a long way from silicon valley and think robotaxis are kind of interesting.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#156
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is something I don’t get. The general cost of living is sky rocketing, largely due to this push and some of the population thinks there is prosperity for all on the otherside of the meat processing machine we’re pushing everyone toward. Groceries are going to get more expensive. Every dollar we spend on over building AI infrastructure is a dollar we never get back. We could use this money for other things such a…

the idea is to use AI to build super productive farms and greenhouses, improve the capability to do that in urban areas, automated and super efficient transportation. but it's not just AI doing all that, it's someone who wants to start a business using AI himself to figure out how to best start up a greenhouse in his community and setup the tech infra needed including the API for people to be able to view available p…

> the idea is to use AI to build super productive farms and greenhouses

How? What are the mechanisms in which AI will lead to farms and greenhouses being more productive? How will AI improve the existing automation that already exists for the farming sector, and has existed for a hundred years?

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#157
post #3

While it's all true, I think it's exciting that there's a country that's not afraid of betting when all the signs point to AI being accerelated. USA already bet on software when it let China overtake manufacturing. Now the only worse thing to betting on AI would be slowing it down inside USA.

What signs point to any sort of acceleration besides in spending? Most major companies have released new versions in the past year, but if people were asked to blindly determine whether they were using the newer or older version, I suspect the results would be close to random. It seems to me that the difference between versions is sharply decreasing in a way that seems to be asymptotic, similar to what happens in lit…

Mainly growing energy demand of AI deployments leading to capacity increases becoming the bottleneck. The key challenge is going to be scaling up energy production in the US.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#158
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's too bad we also can't really agree on what value is. A decade or two ago, I'd have told you the companies that are building new technologies (smartphones, streaming services, etc) were creating value. I don't think that at all anymore, even retroactively.

> A decade or two ago, I'd have told you the companies that are building new technologies (smartphones, streaming services, etc) were creating value. I feel like I’m getting old saying this, but no, I was there and the entire tech community went hard against smartphones, claiming they would never be better than a Pocket PC or a Palm Pilot and were simply another marketing ploy by Apple. They claimed that they were in…

Yeah, I... don't think we're on the same page at all. Not only is "smartphones" just an example of things I no longer see as "creating value", but the value vs MP3 players and other devices at the time is also not what I'm talking about.

Whatever axe you have to grind against the smartphone naysayers of the time... I have no horse in that race.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#159
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there is an AI race, I have zero doubt that China WILL win. A race to what? What does the winner get? What does the loser get? What does 'winning' even fucking mean? My statistical next token predictor is better than your statistical next token predictor?

Using AI in commercial applications to gain a strategic advantage over your competitors. China will use AI to do things that the USA will shudder at, they already have automated ports that are 10 times more efficient than ours, and we can’t even think about upgrading because our longshoremen unions are too strong.

As long as you realize a strong Chinese dollar is the worst thing that could happen to China right now, and as long as we just excuse away the whole “LLMs make more money than they cost” (which they absolutely do not) sure thing.

Re: America is now one big bet on AI

#160

We're in this weird situation where: 1) the average American is heavily dependent on equities in their 401k for retirement, 2) so the stock market has to go up, 3) but the stock market is already at record valuations and it's difficult to see how forecasted growth levels justify the current valuation let alone an increased valuation, 4) without revenue growth, the only way for companies to sustain EPS growth is massi…

Couldn't agree more. I've been voicing this for the past decade. Its crazy how the system is setup for eventual failure. Its a race to the top, or bottom, depending on who's looking, but for most, the bottom. Companies have to either consolidate by buying all their competitors, and customers, or find a way to deliver the same goods/services for less. Its always less. At some point, not everything can be made with love and good intentions... You can't cut all corners without destroying the integrity of the original product. You can't outsource all the manufacturing without affecting job markets. Manufacturing is already mostly outsourced, now they're going to outsource a lot of the cognitive labor to AI. The never ending chase for consistent quarterly growth numbers has really messed us up and they're not really planning for whats to come. Not that they could plan for AI progressing as quick as it is and replacing jobs as quick as they are, but they're not ready.

We're already seeing governments shaming and gaslighting their citizens as they try to find ways to pay for programs to support as many as possible, saying they don't want to work anymore, they're lazy and have to be given everything, pre-chewed.... When you make it nearly impossible for humans to find worth and purpose by exchanging labor for pay, you devalue any contributions they could have and are racing to a future where most of what humans have to give, outside of original creative thought, and art, which AI can do too so it depend on others willing to find value in it, then you're not left with a whole lot. Most of the population aren't self starting entrepreneurs with an infinite drive for wealth and who want to sacrifice everything for a job. Many just seek stability and want to find something they can be at least ok at and can repeat and provide for themselves and their family. By making jobs that much harder to get, you're adding barriers for most to find work. Many countries have been spoiled by stability for so long, their populations don't view survival as a "fight", maybe a struggle, but not a fight for life. Soon it'll be a fight, if not all out war, and almost no one will be ready for that. IF the economy and government (under whatever system and name you want to call it) was setup to provide for all, knowing all the wealth was centralized and they had a mandate to redistribute resources so all could be comfortable, it would be a different story, and even then, but its not the case. A time is coming soon where companies will start losing customers because customer's spending power will disappear. Companies will have optimized themselves out of a path for future growth by destroying their customer base.

Younger generations are already looking at a future vastly different from the one we saw or thought we'd see. Most things older generations took for granted are literally out of reach. Some older people literally expect younger people to just toughen up and just work hard and make it happen, since they did. Easy to say when their education cost them a couple summers worth of income + maybe a side job. The next generation paid their student loans over years, then decades, some pretty much for life. Now its not just education, owning a home is now out of reach of a lot of people. So now if you have the guts to take on an education, you're dealing with potentially decades of student loans, average homes in the US have gone from around $140,000 to $500,000 over the past 20 years, while incomes adjusted for inflation has grown roughly 12.7% between 2003 and 2023, or roughly 0.6% a year. Add on to that the extra cost of other new necessities the picture is looking very different. Life is more and more equating to financial slavery. Used to be any job enabled you to provide necessities for a family, now unless you live in the middle of nowhere, its harder and harder to even get started. AI is already causing cuts to entry level lobs, thinning out the pipeline for future senior employees..

Its going to be fun they said... Its going to be glorious they said...

One thing for sure, its the people who will pay the price during the adjustment period.

Post reply on HN