Live data from Hacker News

AI is slowing down

wheresyoured.at

571–580 of 820 posts

Re: AI is slowing down

#571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So here's the thing. I am not generally an angry person. But Ed's writing really resonates with me, because for the last four years these people have been making a strategy of scaring the shit out of us while trying to ruin something I genuinely love (coding), while simultaneously fucking up the economy and multiple industries and turning the internet into slop. I very badly want more people to call these guys "chuck…

> Almost every programmer I know personally has a pretty measured opinion on where these things are useful and where they're not. The breathless hype seems mostly from non coders. We have polar opposite media bubbles. I see OG programmers all over my timeline either grieving the "end of software engineering" (a la Ryan Dahl) or extolling "automatic programming" (a la antirez).

> We have polar opposite media bubbles. I see OG programmers all over my timeline

The person you’re replying to, in the bit you quoted, said specifically:

> Almost every programmer I know personally

People you know personally are not a “media bubble”. They are, to borrow your expression, polar opposites. It’s people you can speak with candidly and trust versus bits of text without the full context.

Re: AI is slowing down

#572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How’s that meme go? "We are 2/3 years into being 6 months away from AI taking all white collar jobs". The criticism goes both ways. The word "fixed", in Ed terms, can be translated to "become a viable business that justifies the spend". In regards to AI video, I think the fact that Sora is no long around is an indicator. And there is seemingly no real appetite for AI video outside of memes, jokes, and misinformation,…

[flagged]

If the performance and accuracy was there, don't you think there would be a market other than memes?

Re: AI is slowing down

#573
post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but does that vibe invalidate the argument? What an odd time the middle of an argument is to be clutching pearls and worrying about prose quality. Style and vibes notwithstanding, is there anything in your view that wrong with the argument itself? Could a better or more polite writer have convinced you with the same shape of logic?

It shows that the author has a strong negative emotional reaction towards AI which likely influences his opinions and impartiality. He is preaching to the choir, if you already hate AI you will love the article, if you don't hate AI already you will find the article insufferable.

> He is preaching to the choir, if you already hate AI you will love the article, if you don't hate AI already you will find the article insufferable.

I'm neither (or both, if you want - I can hate the direction its taking humanity while not hating my usage of it or opportunities it brings), and I definitely did not find his writing to be either lovable or insufferable.

I enjoyed reading it in a "smells-like-BOFH-but-in-finance" type of way.

Re: AI is slowing down

#574

Lots of dismissive comments ITT, very few tackling the substance of the article. > AI Cannot Afford To Slow Down — It Needs $3 Trillion Or More In Revenue By End Of 2030 To Sustain Its Existence Is this true? With the total 2024 wages being 11.7 trillion USD [0], and nonfarm payrolls totaling 158,000 in the same year [1], it's an order of magnitude higher than my back of the napkin guesses I've made that AI needs to…

#3 Trillion, or even more, will be achievable. We are at the very beginning of the monetization of AI. It all started with the free Chat GPT, and a few others. Now the standard is $20 a month if you are not using AI tools too much and you don't need anything fancier. Otherwise you need to pay more, like $200 a month.

Unless you are not company and you don't have some "enterprise deal". And you need an enterprise deal, as 1) it guarantees that your (and your customers) data will not be sold to someone else 2) you are scared that your competitor will have such deal and become much more productive.

This is what we have now. What will be the future?

Well, soon, if you want something like financial advice or medical advice or job search/CV polishing you will be told, that your $20/$200 is not covering that, you need to purchase additional model to have that. Will you do that? It depends how much you are desperate to get medical advice or find a job.

Anthropic Mythos is an example. Soon, if you are programmer and you will ask AI Agent to spot a bugs, AI Agent will tell you that you need to buy extra model for this. Same with performance analysis, same with the design using tool X, Y or Z.

This is pretty scary, as it will put our well-being, productivity in the hands of few corps. It will be event worst that Google Search monopoly we used to have (until AI chats broke this, replacing Google Monopoly with a few other vendors monopoly).

Can this be prevented? Surely. Hopefully we will have capable open models and consumer-level hardware will catch up. But I think this is the place where governments should step in, invest into alternative models which will be at least comparable with flagships.

Chinese models shows that this is doable, DeepSeek is worst than Chat GPT/Claude/Gemini, but not that much and is clearly better than Grok (which is a huge disappointment for me). I guess India would join this game (especially with nationalist like Modi as the leader).

Europe could join this game, the problem is it kills its capabilities with high energy prices and inability to come out with some reasonable, well financed solution. So the only thing EU was able to come up with is some set of regulations that are blocking fast AI development in Europe...

There is French Mistral, but it is French, it is under-financed, it is only-French, as France would not like to lose control over it.

Germany have totally different strategy, they invest into manufacturing oriented AI, what makes a lot of sense, but does not help with the dangers we are facing.

The rest of the Europe is just too poor to spend billions on AI.

There is still time to buckle up for Europe, but given the course of events, stupidity of Brussels elites who does not see the storm coming I am not optimistic.

Re: AI is slowing down

#575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So here's the thing. I am not generally an angry person. But Ed's writing really resonates with me, because for the last four years these people have been making a strategy of scaring the shit out of us while trying to ruin something I genuinely love (coding), while simultaneously fucking up the economy and multiple industries and turning the internet into slop. I very badly want more people to call these guys "chuck…

I want to be one data point seeing as this goes uncontested (the ones in the know don’t care anymore to be honest). They are not only useful it is obvious they are. If you don’t see it I really, really don’t know what to tell you. You can tell yourself I am bot or shill or whatever if that helps you sleep but .. just trying to help out another dev here. Wake the F up.

> it is obvious they are. If you don’t see it I really, really don’t know what to tell you. (…) just trying to help out another dev here. Wake the F up.

Your whole post is dismissive and insulting and has zero arguments. No one is helped by that, no one is going to change their mind with that, you’re only making the divide more pronounced. You’re being actively unhelpful.

> You can tell yourself I am bot or shill or whatever

I mean, your account was obviously created specifically to post that comment…

Re: AI is slowing down

#576
post #557

Ed's posts always sing the same tune - AI spend is unsustainable. But why are the investors pouring into these megacorps allowing them to burn cash? What calculations are the investors making? I would like to see those projections, assumptions and backout plans.

Why bubbles happen? Because investors, out of greed, pour into corporations that burn their cash.

The internet was a bubble: you could make a web page and sell it for millions because next year it was going to be worth billions. And then internet grew up.

AI is technology that's still beginning to find its place to settle. It's far from mature and that's perfectly fine. We'll have reached a reasonable plateau once the technology and the related stack stops changing every month and instead develops incrementally and boringly over the span of few years. That's like internet in the 2008-2010, and many investors will have a collection of new burn marks by that time.

Not only financially there's an unsustainable push for AI by the zealots du jour who are more often than not managers rather than engineers. AI is championed most ruthlessly as a silver bullet revolution by people who least grasp the limitations of AI. It'll take some time to figure out the dreamed-up proceeds won't be there, and "then what?".

I predict that the real bottlenecks of development will re-emerge as soon as the limitations of AI will manifest out of the hype. They bottlenecks are human-based, in development processes and in human interactions. A large part of development is trying to understand what we want and what we need and you can't offload that to AI.

Re: AI is slowing down

#577
post #557

Ed's posts always sing the same tune - AI spend is unsustainable. But why are the investors pouring into these megacorps allowing them to burn cash? What calculations are the investors making? I would like to see those projections, assumptions and backout plans.

Greater fool theory, obviously :-/

Re: AI is slowing down

#578

Lots of dismissive comments ITT, very few tackling the substance of the article. > AI Cannot Afford To Slow Down — It Needs $3 Trillion Or More In Revenue By End Of 2030 To Sustain Its Existence Is this true? With the total 2024 wages being 11.7 trillion USD [0], and nonfarm payrolls totaling 158,000 in the same year [1], it's an order of magnitude higher than my back of the napkin guesses I've made that AI needs to…

There is no substance to the article to tackle. Ed Zitron is a clown that makes seven million dollars a year writing unsubstantiated bullshit on the internet. He has been consistently wrong in every single one of his predictions and will continue predicting the sky is falling, because his content has zero educational value. It is purely a confirmation-bias inducing dopamine hit for the perpetually aggrieved.

Re: AI is slowing down

#579
post #557

Ed's posts always sing the same tune - AI spend is unsustainable. But why are the investors pouring into these megacorps allowing them to burn cash? What calculations are the investors making? I would like to see those projections, assumptions and backout plans.

I suspect that it's merely a long-shot bet that AI/LLMs will drastically change the nature of the world's economy and workforce. If there's only a 0.1% chance of that happening, but promises a chance of giving out 10,000% the return, then it kind of makes sense.

Re: AI is slowing down

#580

I have been a pretty consistent user of AI since 2022 (Instruct-GPT), so I don't have a bad opinion about the topic. However, I think the real problem now has become pretty obvious. We are hitting a reality wall, where we simply don't have enough ressources to feed the AI industry. We don't generate enough electrical power nor enough GPU or TPU. For the first time in computer science, the real issue here is the finit…

Aren't small local models worse efficiency-wise? It means that every person must have a powerful enough machine to power a small model, and we are very, very far away from that. The best solution, from an efficiency point of view, is to use smaller models on datacenters, requiring much less of them.

There's an efficiency sweet spot where hardware that people have anyway gets a higher percentage of load.

MacBooks have a lot of memory and a lot of FLOPs. They mostly sit unused all day. Yes, the excess energy use will be higher than a GPU in a datacenter doing the same work, but you have to generate an absurd amount of tokens before the dollar-efficiency catches up with the MacBook.

Post reply on HN