21–30 of 189 posts
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
It is like being in a city where Edison wired up lights.. and people are like..well I guess electricity has played out! We have only begun to extract the value of commoditized intelligence. Sure there are arguments on local models and pricing power.. but I think we will be compute constrained for the near future.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
Ever since the 2008 housing crisis, people have been predicting the next bubble-burst/black-swan event.
The one that really crushed the markets was the one almost body saw coming: Covid-19.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
It is like being in a city where Edison wired up lights.. and people are like..well I guess electricity has played out! We have only begun to extract the value of commoditized intelligence. Sure there are arguments on local models and pricing power.. but I think we will be compute constrained for the near future.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
It is like being in a city where Edison wired up lights.. and people are like..well I guess electricity has played out! We have only begun to extract the value of commoditized intelligence. Sure there are arguments on local models and pricing power.. but I think we will be compute constrained for the near future.
Similarly, majority of people still don't 3D-print stuff they can get cheaply at Walmart or from Amazon. Or use VR/AR as their primary form of interaction.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
inning 9 of the money/hype train, i think it's still inning 3 of the overall technology.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
inning 9 of the money/hype train, i think it's still inning 3 of the overall technology.
Although at its peak, CSCO was up ~2500% in a 5-year period, whereas NVDA is “only” up ~1000% in a similar timeframe.
Has anyone seen a definitive mathematical proof of this? I have seen countless articles and exposes about the hidden debt. These are incredibly sophisticated companies so presumably they wouldn’t let themselves get into a company ending bind. But what are the chances this is actually an MBS type situation where the system is truly overloaded and a few sacrificial lambs are needed?
> Has anyone seen a definitive mathematical proof of this? I have seen countless articles and exposes about the hidden debt. There's an old WSB saying: the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent. The AI craze is that but on 'roids. > These are incredibly sophisticated companies so presumably they wouldn’t let themselves get into a company ending bind. The problem is, company C-levels don't ca…
Has anyone seen a definitive mathematical proof of this? I have seen countless articles and exposes about the hidden debt. These are incredibly sophisticated companies so presumably they wouldn’t let themselves get into a company ending bind. But what are the chances this is actually an MBS type situation where the system is truly overloaded and a few sacrificial lambs are needed?
eh trolling for clicks. It's just not on the balance sheet (if i have my terms correct) so you have to look in a different report to find the numbers. If it was truly hidden then discovery of the debt would trigger lawsuits from investors. Major investors know about it already that's why no one is getting upset over it except for laymen. btw, laymen in the stock market (retail investors) just serve as red meat or cannon fodder for actual traders with real money and real information.
edit: there will def. be significant winners and losers, the stakes are very high and the dollar amounts are very large.
As a bystander directly immune to the fortunes of AI going up or down, it does feel like there are a lot more people thinking this is inning 9 of the LLM story than there are people thinking it's inning 3. Which makes it tempting to believe it's probably closer to inning 3.
Right - black swans are by definition things that the majority didn't see coming. Ever since the 2008 housing crisis, people have been predicting the next bubble-burst/black-swan event. The one that really crushed the markets was the one almost body saw coming: Covid-19.