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

151–160 of 752 posts

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

#151

Post by thewebguyd »

n8cpdx wrote: post #83
pksebben wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they already have that confirmation. When we bailed the banks out in 08 we basically said "If you're big enough that we'd be screwed without you then take whatever risks you like with impunity". That's a reduction of complexity, of course, but the core of the lesson is there. We have actually kept on with all the practices that led to the housing crash (MBS, predatory lending, Mixing investment and traditiona…

> If you're big enough that we'd be screwed without you then take whatever risks you like with impunity". I know financially it will be bad because number not go up and number need go up. But do we actually depend on generative/agentic AI at all in meaningful ways? I’m pretty sure all LLMs could be Thanos snapped away and there would be near zero material impact. If the studies are at all reliable all the programmers…

> I’m pretty sure all LLMs could be Thanos snapped away and there would be near zero material impact.

I mostly agree, but I don't think it's the model developers that would get bailed out. OpenAI & Anthropic can fail, and should be let to fail if it comes to that.

Nvidia is the one that would get bailed out. As would Microsoft, if it came to that.

I also think they should be let to fail, but there's no way the US GOV ever allows them to.

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

#152

Post by Eisenstein »

FloorEgg wrote: post #146
cedws wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 no…

When you say that this pattern plays out, can you be specific?

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

#153

Post by miloignis »

gretch wrote: post #112
nurettin wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why trade individual stocks anyway? Cost averaging ETFs is a proven way to building wealth. S&P goes down 20%, you average down, it recovers and you get another 2-3 years of growth. This goes on until civilization collapses.

If you buy ETFs, you basically hold some stocks you don't want. For example, stock from war profiteering companies (lockheed, raytheon). Note that investing in war profiteers is a proven way to build wealth. I just don't want to do that. This argument not only applies to evil companies, but also dumb ones. For example, I have no interest in investing in IBM or Oracle even those both of those are also money makers.

You could buy ETFs and then short the stocks you don't like more, I suppose.

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

#154

Post by JumpCrisscross »

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…

> when does a bubble pop

This one? When China commits to subsidising and releasing cutting-edge open-source models. What BYD did to Tesla's FSD fee dreams, Beijing could do to American AI's export ambitions.

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

#155

Post by diroussel »

lazide wrote: post #126
bigbuppo wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Meta or Google disappared overnight, it would be, at worst, a minor annoyance for most of the world. Despite the fact that both companies are advertising behemoths, marketing departments everywhere would celebrate their end.

Considering how much of the world runs on WhatsApp alone, that’s laughably wrong.

So if WhatsApp had an outage, but you needed to communicate to someone, you wouldn't be able to? Don't you have contacts saved locally, and other message apps available?

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

#156

Post by Eisenstein »

thewebguyd wrote: post #136
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? The same people who are buying products and services right now. Just 10% of the US population is responsible for nearly 50% of consumption. We are just going to bifurcate even more into the haves and have-nots. Maybe that 10% now becomes responsible for 70+% of consumption and everyone else is fighting for scraps. It won't be s…

I posit that the consumption is the problem.

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

#157

Post by JumpCrisscross »

convolvatron wrote: post #145
jaennaet wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> since it probably wouldn't cause there to be an actual hole, its really more about long term fab build plans than anything else

Equities are forward looking. TSMC's valuation doesn't make sense if it doesn't have a backlog to grow into.

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

#158

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Irishsteve wrote: post #107
vineyardmike wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, a sell off for who? If they’ve securitized and sold their data center buildout, will the big clouds and AI labs actually face any severe impact? While the sums are huge, most of these companies have the cash on hand to pay down the debt. The big AI labs have said their models earn enough to cover the cost to train themselves, just not the next one. This means they could at any time walk away from the…

It’s an insurance company so basically pensions.

> It’s an insurance company

What is?

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

#159

Post by Karrot_Kream »

Demiurge wrote: post #147
cedws wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yeah if you bar over 50% of your workforce from working at market clearing wages then naturally the other 50% are going to get paid at their expense. When you underpay minorities and often outright ban women from working formal employment, it's not hard to see how wages for the others remain high.

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

#160

Post by rozap »

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…

Realistically I think there are two outcomes:

AGI succeeds and there are mass layoffs, money is concentrated further in the hands of those who own compute.

OR

AI bubble pops and there are mass layoffs, with bailouts going to the largest players to prevent a larger collapse, which drives inflation and further marginalizes asset-less people.

I honestly don't see a third option unless there is government intervention, which seems extremely far fetched given it's owned by the group of people who would benefit from either scenario presented above.

Post reply on HN