161–170 of 296 posts
I wonder what percentage of GDP is spent on crypto.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The side effects of spending funds on these mega projects is also something to consider. NASA spending has created a huge pile of technologies that we use day to day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies .
> NASA spending has created a huge pile of technologies that we use day to day We're a little too early to know if that's the case here too. I do foresee a chance at a reality where AI is a dead end, but after it we have a ton of cheap GPU compute lying about, which we all rush to somehow convert into useful compute (by emulating CPU's or translating traditional algorithms into GPU oriented ones or whatever).
But AI proliferation is not stopping soon, because we've not picked up even the low hanging fruits just yet. Again, even if no new SOTA models were to be trained after today, there's years if not decades of R&D work into how to best use the ones we have - how to harness the big ones, where to embed the small ones, and of course, more fundamental exploration of the latent spaces and how they formed, to inform information sciences, cognitive sciences, and perhaps even philosophy.
And if that runs out or there is an Anti AI Revolution, we can still run those weather models and route planners on the chips once occupied by LLMs - just don't tell the proles that those too are AI, or it's guillotine o'clock again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling the GPUs the shovels is bonkers because a) shovels are cheap, GPUs are not. And b) when you build a bridge the bridge doesn’t need shovels to be passable. Without GPUs, the datacenter is useless, the model is useless, etc. If anything, the GPUs are the steel that the bridge is made of. Each beam can be replaced, but if too many fail the bridge is impassible. A bridge with a 6 year lifespan for each beam is in…
You’re taking the metaphor way too literally. The people who made the most profit weren’t literally selling shovels, they were the ones providing logistics and support services to the gold miners, like hauling tons of equipment over tens of miles of mountain or providing the sales channel for the gold. They siphoned off most of the profit from the ventures that depended on them (like LLMs depend on GPUs) because the…
Today this is real estate. And it's something people keep forgetting when arguing that ${whatever breakthrough or just more competition} will make ${some good or service} cheaper for consumers: prices of other things elsewhere will raise to compensate and consume any average surplus. Money left on the table doesn't stay there for long.
Further evidence that the US, for whatever reason, lacks basic ability to rationally use resources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The railroads and the interstate are arguably the biggest and broadest impact, especially in 2nd order effects (everything West of the Mississippi would be vastly different economically without them). I am not an ai-booster, but I would not be surprised at AI having a similar enabling effect over the long term. My caveat being that I am not sure the massive data center race going on right now will be what makes it ha…
> I would not be surprised at AI having a similar enabling effect over the long term. The big difference is that the current AI bubble isn't building durable infrastructure. Building the railroads or the interstate was obscenely expensive, but 100+ years down the line we are still profiting from the investments made back then. Massive startup costs, relatively low costs to maintain and expand. AI is a different story…
It's always like that with software. You can still run an OS or a program made 20 years ago, in some cases that program may in fact have no modern replacements available (think niche domains) - meanwhile, in those 20 years, you've probably churned through 5-10 generations of computing hardware.
This tweet shows it as a percentage of US GDP: https://x.com/paulg/status/2045120274551423142 Makes it a little less dramatic. But also shows what a big **'n deal the railroads were!
GDP adjustments are warranted, but it is more stark than both the estimates suggest. The megaprojects of the previous generations all had decades long depreciation schedules. Many 50-100+ year old railways, bridges, tunnels or dams and other utilities are still in active use with only minimal maintenance Amortized Y-o-Y the current spends would dwarf everything at the reported depreciation schedule of 6(!) years for…
This tweet shows it as a percentage of US GDP: https://x.com/paulg/status/2045120274551423142 Makes it a little less dramatic. But also shows what a big **'n deal the railroads were!
GDP adjustments are warranted, but it is more stark than both the estimates suggest. The megaprojects of the previous generations all had decades long depreciation schedules. Many 50-100+ year old railways, bridges, tunnels or dams and other utilities are still in active use with only minimal maintenance Amortized Y-o-Y the current spends would dwarf everything at the reported depreciation schedule of 6(!) years for…
That said, I'm pretty sure in a compute-hungry AI world you aren't going to retire GPUs every 6 years anymore. Even if compute capacity jumps such that current H100s only represent 10% of total compute available in 6 years, you're still running those H100s until they turn to dust.
I just think it's hard to compare localized railroad infrastructure to globalized AI capacity and say one was more rational than the other on a % of GDP basis until the history actually plays out.
If you compare global investment in nuclear weapons it would dwarf the manhattan project and AI thus far, and yet, 99.99999% of nuclear weapons investment is just "wasted" capacity in that it has never been "used." But the value it has created in other ways (MAD-enabled peace) has surely been profitable on net. Nobody would have predicted this at the time.
Playing armchair internet pessimist about the "new thing" always makes you feel smart but is usually not a good idea since you always mis-price what you don't know about the future (which is almost everything).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Makes it a little less dramatic. But also shows what a big *'n deal the railroads were! It also makes it more dramatic, consider the programs on the list and what they have in common. * The Apollo program. A government-funded science project. No return on investment required. * The Manhattan Project. A government-funded military project. No return on investment required. * The F-35 program. A government funded mili…
European railroad bubble failed? Can you explain that? I really have no idea what you are referring to?
The bubble failed in the sense that massive commitments for new railways were made, and then the 1847 economic crisis caused investment to dry up, which collapsed the bubble and put a halt to the railroad construction boom. Those railway commitments never materialized, and stock market crashes followed.
I'm also being a little cheeky with what "massive economic trouble" entails; While the stock market was heavy on railroads and crashed right into a recession, the world in the mid-1800s was much less financialized so the consequences in absolute terms were less pronounced than a similar bubble-collapse would be today. As such, the main historical comparison is structural.
(Similarly, the AI bubble is likely to burst "by itself" unless OpenAI's IPO is truly catastrophically bad. What's more likely is that a recession happens and then the recession triggers a stock market collapse, which then intensify eachother. And so these historical examples of similar situations may prove illustrative.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And I'm not an AI doomer, but hell no, give me another space program/station over this every single time and pretty please. We are not pioneering new engineering science or creating a pipeline of hard research and innovation that will spread in and better our everyday lives for the decades to come. We are overbuilding boring data centers packed with single-purpose chips that WILL BE obsolete within a couple years, fo…
>There is no indication that LLMs are a pathway to meaningful and transformative AI. Reality check, they are already astoundingly meaningful and transformative AI. They can converse in natural language, recall any common fact off the top of their heads, do research online and synthesize new information, translate between different human languages (and explain the nuances involved), translate a vague hand wavey descri…
The onus of the proof regarding their meaningful and transformative nature is on you.
The largest niche LLMs have so far managed to carve for themselves is software code, with the jury still on the fence as whether the productivity needle actually moved in one direction or the other, and the other, literal jury, enshrining the fact that vibe-coded software is not copyrightable and becomes a public good, that should give pause to any company living of selling software or software-related services as whether they want to poison their well.
Web search hasn't been disrupted very much either with users being quick to realise how hallucinogenic LLM summaries are (with the fact that it's baked in the tech and practically unsolvable being one of the reasons I don't consider LLMs a significant stepping stone towards actual AI).
The age of computers that respond to voice orders was 10 years ago, with Siri, Alexa, Google Assistant, nobody could care less then, and the fact the same systems became less capable after re-inventing themselves on top of LLMs probably won't have people care more now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The side effects of spending funds on these mega projects is also something to consider. NASA spending has created a huge pile of technologies that we use day to day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies .
> NASA spending has created a huge pile of technologies that we use day to day We're a little too early to know if that's the case here too. I do foresee a chance at a reality where AI is a dead end, but after it we have a ton of cheap GPU compute lying about, which we all rush to somehow convert into useful compute (by emulating CPU's or translating traditional algorithms into GPU oriented ones or whatever).