Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 752 posts

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#141

Post by ndriscoll »

Anonyneko wrote: post #133
ndriscoll wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you live in a home you own with no mortgage? Do you have a fully electrified home, only EVs, and enough solar to run those things? You can make real concrete capital investments instead of abstract financial ones to reduce your required living/"operating" expenses, insulating you somewhat from the state of financial markets.

This doesn't seem to work very well in economies where housing isn't constantly appreciating like crazy (I'm not from the US)...

It does if you're paying for that housing (either rent or mortgage payments). People invest into stocks while simultaneously holding a liability (e.g. they need to somehow come up with payments to continue living somewhere, or to continue having heating/cooling/lights). If you think all of the financial investments available to you might crash, and your source of income may evaporate in a correlated event, you can instead put all of your money into minimizing your liabilities. The goal is not to see your home value increase--you're not trying to sell it. It's to secure everything you need to have the standard of living you want by owning those things.

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#142

Post by RajT88 »

OptionOfT wrote: post #114

Interestingly I think if the AI succeed at the level that a lot of these CEOs hope we're not much better off either. And the sentiment that goes around is more: reduce the amount of people needed to do the same amount of work: https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/mckinsey_ai_monetizat... > McKinsey says, while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work…

> The problem becomes that eventually all these people who are laid off are not going to find new roles.

At least one sci-fi author has gamed this out:

https://marshallbrain.com/manna1

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#143

Post by Avicebron »

cedws wrote: post #137
OptionOfT wrote: post #114

Interestingly I think if the AI succeed at the level that a lot of these CEOs hope we're not much better off either. And the sentiment that goes around is more: reduce the amount of people needed to do the same amount of work: https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/mckinsey_ai_monetizat... > McKinsey says, while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work…

I don't even know what the selling point of AI is for regular people. In the 60s it was possible for a man to work an ordinary job, buy a house, settle down with a wife and support two or three children. That's completely out of the realm of reality for many young people now and the plummeting birth rates show it. The middle class have financially benefited very little from the past 20+ years of productivity gains. S…

What's crazy is that people will jump all over themselves to say "well you could totally live like that at a 1960s level" like that's even a viable possibility today (in the US).

What's that about the falcon and the falconer? The center cannot hold..

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#144

Post by TulliusCicero »

nicce wrote: post #77
ghostpepper wrote: post #51

Does anyone really think it’s “if” and not “when” ?

More like that when it happens, how big the pop is.

It's also possible it'll be more of a deflation than a pop.

That's what I'm personally hoping for anyway, would rather the economy avoid a big recession.

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#145

Post by convolvatron »

jaennaet wrote: post #131
wmf wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, TSMC demand might go down from 300% to 100%.

So yes, it would have an effect; even with your imaginary numbers that'd be a 3x drawdown

it might bring in the schedules, but since it probably wouldn't cause there to be an actual hole, its really more about long term fab build plans than anything else

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#146

Post by FloorEgg »

cedws wrote: post #137
OptionOfT wrote: post #114

Interestingly I think if the AI succeed at the level that a lot of these CEOs hope we're not much better off either. And the sentiment that goes around is more: reduce the amount of people needed to do the same amount of work: https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/mckinsey_ai_monetizat... > McKinsey says, while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work…

I don't even know what the selling point of AI is for regular people. In the 60s it was possible for a man to work an ordinary job, buy a house, settle down with a wife and support two or three children. That's completely out of the realm of reality for many young people now and the plummeting birth rates show it. The middle class have financially benefited very little from the past 20+ years of productivity gains. S…

To me this all just looks like a big frothy chemical reaction playing out far beyond any one person's control.

With that view, many things oscillate over time, including game theory patterns (average interaction intentions of win-win, win-lose, lose-lose), and integration / mitosis (unions, international treaties, civil wars),etc.

So my optimistic view is that inevitably we will get more tech whether we want it or not, and it will probably make things worse many for a while, but then it will simultaneously enable and force a restructuring at some level that starts a new cycle of prosperity. On the other side it will be clear that all this tech directly enables a better (more free, more diverse, more rewarding, more sustainable) way of life.

I believe this because from studying history it seems this pattern plays out over and over and over again to varying degrees.

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#147

Post by Demiurge »

cedws wrote: post #137
OptionOfT wrote: post #114

Interestingly I think if the AI succeed at the level that a lot of these CEOs hope we're not much better off either. And the sentiment that goes around is more: reduce the amount of people needed to do the same amount of work: https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/mckinsey_ai_monetizat... > McKinsey says, while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work…

I don't even know what the selling point of AI is for regular people. In the 60s it was possible for a man to work an ordinary job, buy a house, settle down with a wife and support two or three children. That's completely out of the realm of reality for many young people now and the plummeting birth rates show it. The middle class have financially benefited very little from the past 20+ years of productivity gains. S…

> In the 60s it was possible for a man to work an ordinary job, buy a house, settle down with a wife and support two or three children.

Every kind of a man, or woman?

> Do people really think more technology is going to be the path to a better society? Because to me it looks like the opposite.

Well, this probably why statistics exist.

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#148

Post by AstroBen »

techblueberry wrote: post #88
ghostpepper wrote: post #51

Does anyone really think it’s “if” and not “when” ?

I've been trying to grok this idea of - when does a bubble pop. Like in theory if everyone knows it's a bubble, that should cause it to pop, because people should be making their way to the exists, playing music chairs to get their money out early. But as I try to sort of narrative the ideas behind bubbles and bursts, one thing I realize, is that I think in order for a bubble to burst, people essentially have to want…

Eventually money to invest will run out. If earnings of the companies doesn't catch up we'll reach a situation where stock prices reach a peak, have limited future expected returns, and then it'll pop when there's a better opportunity for the money

Imagine if interest rates go up and you can get 5% from a savings account. One big player pulls out cash triggering a minor drop in AI stocks. Panic sells happen trying to not be the last one out of the door, margin calls etc.

You're assuming cash will never stop flowing in driving up prices. It will. The only way it goes on forever is if the companies end up being wildly profitable

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#149

Post by TulliusCicero »

viccis wrote: post #59

Very cool and healthy for the CEO of a company investing massive amounts into a given technology to casually refer to it as a "bubble" at the same time. I guess he softens the statement a bit by calling it "an AI bubble" instead of the "the AI bubble", but it's still interesting to see everyone involved in this economic mess start to acknowledge it.

Unironically agreed that it's good for a CEO to remain relatively level headed and clear eyed.

The comparison made to the dotcom bubble is apt. It was a bubble, but that didn't mean that all the internet and e-commerce ideas were wrong, it was more a matter of investing too much too early. When the AI bubble pops or deflates, progress on AI models will continue on.

Re: Google boss says AI investment boom has 'elements of irrationality'

#150

Post by JumpCrisscross »

OptionOfT wrote: post #114

Interestingly I think if the AI succeed at the level that a lot of these CEOs hope we're not much better off either. And the sentiment that goes around is more: reduce the amount of people needed to do the same amount of work: https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/mckinsey_ai_monetizat... > McKinsey says, while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work…

> Who is going to be buying the products and services if no-one has money to throw around?

We have no basis for seriously considering this hypothetical when it comes to LLMs.

Post reply on HN