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

After the AI Crash

potsandpansbyccg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 244 posts

Re: After the AI Crash

#31

Post by mosura »

contagiousflow wrote: post #13
mosura wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the strong arguments in favor of AI accelerationism is net pain reduction by making the transition period as short as possible. Ideas like “pacing” or a crash and reboot will prolong the inevitable.

What is inevitable?

Artificial intelligence.

If humans are machines executing on some medium eventually it will be possible to emulate them on some other medium. Believing otherwise requires some essentially religious convictions on the existence of the soul or similar.

Re: After the AI Crash

#32

Post by zero_shift »

phoronixrly wrote: post #19
contagiousflow wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is inevitable?

That all persons doing intellectual work die of hunger as they cannot find a job. At least that's how I understand what the parent commenter is implying. They say that all people doing intellectual work better die quickly so they don't suffer a long 'transition period' to inevitably being dead of hunger.

Wonderful. And these people call themselves utilitarians too. God / Buddha / Allah / Batman, save me from their kindness!

Re: After the AI Crash

#33

Post by toasty228 »

Kuyawa wrote: post #14

AI investment will crash but AI itself (the technology) will continue thriving, learning, improving and there is absolutely no way to stop it. The only reading on the crystal ball is if US companies fail, China will take the lead by leaps and bounds, so the only solution is to keep pushing the cart until the wheels come off or we all cross the finish line, together.

> absolutely no way to stop it.

Unless if they take down the flat rate subs and you have to pay api prices, usage will drop a lot. Right now I freelance using gpt, if I had to pay api prices I'd probably lose 50% of the income, if not more, with the ~40% tax on top I might as well spend my time doing something else

Re: After the AI Crash

#34

Post by joshstrange »

> Most new technologies have been welcomed by the public with open arms.

I'm not going to predict how this is going to turn out in either direction but this statement gives me pause. I don't think that's ever been true. Yes, the siren song is strong but initially most new tech is met with skepticism. Are we so quick to forget "the internet/computers are just a fad"-type thinking?

Re: After the AI Crash

#35

Post by cmiles8 »

It’s not a question of if but when at this point.

To parallel to The Big Short this is the point in the movie where folks realize it’s mathematically impossible for things to not implode and so players are quietly positioning themselves for that eventuality before things are allowed to blow.

It’s been a dramatic shift these last six months but everywhere I look now folks are quietly preparing their battle armor to survive what’s about to unfold.

The tech will stay, but the AI business landscape will have a market-cleansing forest fire.

There’s a whole generation in tech now that’s never seen what happens when a bubble like this unravels. I fully expect we’ll see the likes of offices just abandoned overnight with food still in the fridge as AI company after AI company just vaporizes.

Re: After the AI Crash

#36

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

contagiousflow wrote: post #13
mosura wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the strong arguments in favor of AI accelerationism is net pain reduction by making the transition period as short as possible. Ideas like “pacing” or a crash and reboot will prolong the inevitable.

What is inevitable?

Technological changes to economic conditions in general are not possible to opt out of forever. I'm not an AI accelerationist myself, because I think there are severe risks beyond the merely economic, but the auto industry is a good example of where many countries are engaging in what one might call "EV accelerationism". In principle you don't have to, it's possible to let them roll out only to the extent that the market naturally demands, but if you know internal combustion engines will become a niche hobbyist thing by 2050 there's a lot of value in making that transition faster and intentional.

Re: After the AI Crash

#37

Post by Insanity »

rektomatic wrote: post #27
Kuyawa wrote: post #14

AI investment will crash but AI itself (the technology) will continue thriving, learning, improving and there is absolutely no way to stop it. The only reading on the crystal ball is if US companies fail, China will take the lead by leaps and bounds, so the only solution is to keep pushing the cart until the wheels come off or we all cross the finish line, together.

what exactly is this finish line? AGI?

That's what they'll sell you. But fundamentally current LLM implementations seem to be the wrong methodology for 'AGI' and I don't think we're remotely close to having this.

Re: After the AI Crash

#39

Post by contagiousflow »

mosura wrote: post #31
contagiousflow wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is inevitable?

Artificial intelligence. If humans are machines executing on some medium eventually it will be possible to emulate them on some other medium. Believing otherwise requires some essentially religious convictions on the existence of the soul or similar.

Sure, but that only stands if you believe the only purpose of human intelligence is for economic benefit.

Re: After the AI Crash

#40

Post by ltbarcly3 »

There's a very nonzero chance that the AI expenses are not a race to recoup investments as they are a bet (with other people's money) that AI will lead to longevity or immortality, a bet made by aging tech oligarchs. Notice that Ellison is betting his entire company on it, which due to his secured debt is the same as betting his personal fortune in the most extreme case.
Post reply on HN