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

AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 296 posts

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#111

Post by ericd »

rainsford wrote: post #28
kakapo5672 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, and the same with the internet. During the 1990s and 2000s, people kept wondering why the internet wasn't showing up in productivity numbers. Many asked if the internet was therefore just a fad or bubble. Same as some now do with AI. It takes time for technology to show measurable impact in enormous economies. No reason why AI will be any different.

Sure, but you have to consider Carl Sagan's point, "The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." Some truly useful technologies start out slow and the question is asked if they are fads or bubbles even though they end up having huge im…

All those racks of Nvidia machines might not pay off for the companies buying them, but I have a hard time believing that people are still questioning the utility of this stuff. In the last hour, Opus downloaded data for and implemented a couple of APIs that I would’ve otherwise paid hundreds a month for, end to end, from research all the way to testing its implementation. It’s so, incredibly, obviously useful.

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#112

Post by aaronbrethorst »

I have an alternative explanation: for the areas where AI is giving employees serious productivity gains, they're working for 20 minutes, playing wordle/resting/relaxing for 7 hours, 40 minutes, and delivering exactly as much as they were before.

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#113

Post by slg »

afavour wrote: post #104
XenophileJKO wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep seeing the "Productivity Paradox" highlighted over an over again. I think one thing people are missing with this specific technology is that unlike many of the comparisons (computers, internet, broadband, etc), AI in particular doesn't have a high requirement at the consumer side. Everyone already has everything they need to use it. There will be a period like we are in now where dramatic capability gain (like…

> AI in particular doesn't have a high requirement at the consumer side. Everyone already has everything they need to use it. That isn’t actually true though, right now everyone has a hard dependency on a cloud service. That is currently sold to them at deep discount by companies that are losing billions. When the market eventually corrects it’ll be interesting to see how much AI ends up costing. At the very least it…

>That isn’t actually true though, right now everyone has a hard dependency on a cloud service. That is currently sold to them at deep discount by companies that are losing billions.

Isn't that a huge red flag? If customers are being given this product at a discount and it still isn't showing a positive ROI for them, what makes people think it will improve once we're charged full price?

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#114

Post by m4rtink »

jsheard wrote: post #37
yifanl wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference being that AI's marketing has been significantly more prevalent than any early computing efforts.

Not to mention the investment is on another level. We've got companies with valuations in the hundred-billions talking about raising trillions to buy all of the computers in the world, before establishing whether they can even turn a profit, nevermind upend the economy.

I wonder how many actually beneficial projects will not be financed by investors too scared to try anything risky after the AI buble crashes and burns to the ground. :P

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#115

Post by albatross79 »

brokencode wrote: post #49
pluto_modadic wrote: post #5

Why do I have a feeling that this will be ignored as biased by the people who need to read it the most.

Why do I get the feeling that AI skeptics will treat it as definitive and irrefutable proof that they were right all along even though it’s one data point in an industry that’s hasn’t even been around for 5 years.

You're right, it is tempting to dunk on AI boosters every time an article like this comes out and puts a damper on their sci fi fan fiction fantasies. There's just something about a grown person getting all excited like a child that makes it really satisfying.

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#116

Post by bilsbie »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #112

I have an alternative explanation: for the areas where AI is giving employees serious productivity gains, they're working for 20 minutes, playing wordle/resting/relaxing for 7 hours, 40 minutes, and delivering exactly as much as they were before.

Incentives matter

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#117

Post by boxedemp »

co_king_5 wrote: post #45
keybored wrote: post #42

Note last year. The vibes coming from the Claude dungeons tell a different story. Just in the last six weeks. We are on the precipice.

[dead]

Just so we're on the same page, you don't think that an llm is going to achieve AGI right? Like you're thinking some sort of combination between world models, llms, visual models and others. Right?

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#118

Post by rfv6723 »

afavour wrote: post #110
rfv6723 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This outlook is as short-sighted as the 2000 fiber optic bust. Critics then thought overcapacity meant the end, yet that infrastructure eventually created the modern internet. Capital does not walk away from a fundamental shift just because of one market correction. While specific companies may fail, the long-term value of the technology ensures that investment will continue far beyond a five-year window.

But fiber optic created in 2000 is still very usable in 2026. AI hardware purchases in 2026 is going to out of date very quickly by comparison.

The massive investment in power grids and data centers provides a permanent physical backbone that outlives any specific silicon generation. This infrastructure serves as a durable shell for the model design knowledge and chip architectural IP gained through each iteration. Capital is effectively funding a structural moat built on energy access and engineering mastery.

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#119

Post by dougb5 »

arctic-true wrote: post #75
co_king_5 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[dead]

Researchers looked at GPT-3 in 2023 and saw “sparks of AGI”. The saying “feel the AGI” became widespread not long after, if I’m remembering right. We’ve been saying AGI is right around the corner for a while now. And of course, if you predict the end of the world every day, you’ll eventually be right. But for the moment, what we have is an exceptionally powerful coding assistant that can also speed up entry-level wor…

Minor correction: "sparks of AGI" was in reference to GPT-4, which came out 5 months later in 2024. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712)

Re: AI Added 'Basically Zero' to US Economic Growth Last Year, Goldman Sachs Says

#120

Post by bdangubic »

arctic-true wrote: post #89
bdangubic wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the investments are being made by massively profitable companies (our biggest and brightest ones, the ones that have been carrying the economy for quite some time now, even before "AI"). even just in recent history we have seen companies making large investments and being very unprofitable until they weren't anymore (e.g. Uber). and it is always the same story, everyone is up in arms "this is not sustainable etc..."…

The fact that the companies that have already shoveled billions of dollars at this are continuing to do so is equally consistent with AI improvement and adoption stalling as it is with infinite improvement and widespread adoption. Yes, it’s irrational to chase sunk costs - but unlike the VC funds that backed Uber and its competition, may of the players in this game are exposed to public markets, which are not known f…

> If you pull back on your AI investments, the markets will punish you - probably vigorously

quite the opposite is happening as evidenced from last earnings reports…

Post reply on HN