You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them • Hacker News Board

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#11

Post by Juliate » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:16 PM UTC

chuckadams wrote: post #2

The argument seems to be that Metaverse was a flop and FB did bad stuff, therefore AI will be a flop. That's certainly ... words.

She says something more structural than that: there's a pattern, sold by the same people, with the same contempt to social consequences and democratic rules: GenAI, multiverse, NFTs, cryptos; what else next?

Incidentally, each "wave" justifies massive investment in the same technology: GPUs, for transformations that do not materialise _at scale_.

That raises the questions: why? Who captures the value? Who bears the cost? Why are we always skipping the audit? What happens when the "GPU bubble" bursts?

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#12

Post by Mordisquitos » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:16 PM UTC

raincole wrote: post #8

> The future that the vast majority of people want – for themselves, for their children – is not one in which we can only afford to buy digital replicas of products and digital real estate Sure. Everybody wants real things. Nobody wants to work in factory assembly lines or construction sites. But it must be AI's fault.

That fragment of the article is not blaming AI for that. It is criticising Marc Andreesen's literal response in this 2021 interview: https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-dubrovnik-interviews-marc...

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#13

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:16 PM UTC

butthecerntainy wrote: post #4

chuckadams wrote: post #2

The argument seems to be that Metaverse was a flop and FB did bad stuff, therefore AI will be a flop. That's certainly ... words.

The more charitable take is that Big Tech has a track record of branding the 'future' primarily to manufacture FOMO, only for the reality to fall significantly short of the hype.

The author could have made that argument, if she had wanted to, but the actual piece as written does not make it. There’s very little discussion of AI being overhyped in some concrete way, and quite a lot of discussion of various bad deeds committed by “tech” and “tech billionaires”.

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#14

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:19 PM UTC

Juliate wrote: post #11

chuckadams wrote: post #2

The argument seems to be that Metaverse was a flop and FB did bad stuff, therefore AI will be a flop. That's certainly ... words.

She says something more structural than that: there's a pattern, sold by the same people, with the same contempt to social consequences and democratic rules: GenAI, multiverse, NFTs, cryptos; what else next? Incidentally, each "wave" justifies massive investment in the same technology: GPUs, for transformations that do not materialise _at scale_. That raises the questions: why? Who captures the value? Who bears the c…

[deleted]

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#15

Post by trial3 » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:19 PM UTC

mminer237 wrote: post #6

austin-cheney wrote: post #3

Everybody hates tech. Everybody hates tech billionaires. Nobody wants their bullshit. Yes… kind of. I am old and always have been, so naturally I don’t like things I believe children falsely claim they cannot live without. Social media comes to mind.

I wonder if she appreciates the irony of posting that on a website lol

i can’t believe i’m seeing an “yet you participate in society. curious!” reply in the wild

we both know there is an obvious difference between “using Ghost to share a hypertext article” tech and “the metaverse and palantir” Tech

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#16

Post by layer8 » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:22 PM UTC

Juliate wrote: post #11

chuckadams wrote: post #2

The argument seems to be that Metaverse was a flop and FB did bad stuff, therefore AI will be a flop. That's certainly ... words.

She says something more structural than that: there's a pattern, sold by the same people, with the same contempt to social consequences and democratic rules: GenAI, multiverse, NFTs, cryptos; what else next? Incidentally, each "wave" justifies massive investment in the same technology: GPUs, for transformations that do not materialise _at scale_. That raises the questions: why? Who captures the value? Who bears the c…

I don’t think the “GPU bubble” will burst, because linear algebra is widely applicable. It’s no particular mystery that GPUs have found universal applications. I feel sympathetic towards your first paragraph, but there is no conspiracy behind the success of GPUs.

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#17

Post by user____name » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:22 PM UTC

raincole wrote: post #8

> The future that the vast majority of people want – for themselves, for their children – is not one in which we can only afford to buy digital replicas of products and digital real estate Sure. Everybody wants real things. Nobody wants to work in factory assembly lines or construction sites. But it must be AI's fault.

This article is so out of touch. The AI boom is great because it makes the line go up. I mean imagine these frivolities like affordable shelter and forty hour work weeks being some kind of birthright. You don't want to work anymore and we say fine and then we give you a digital pacifier but you're still whining, like these stocks are going to prop themselves.

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#18

Post by Aurornis » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:22 PM UTC

Juliate wrote: post #11

chuckadams wrote: post #2

The argument seems to be that Metaverse was a flop and FB did bad stuff, therefore AI will be a flop. That's certainly ... words.

She says something more structural than that: there's a pattern, sold by the same people, with the same contempt to social consequences and democratic rules: GenAI, multiverse, NFTs, cryptos; what else next? Incidentally, each "wave" justifies massive investment in the same technology: GPUs, for transformations that do not materialise _at scale_. That raises the questions: why? Who captures the value? Who bears the c…

Anti-tech critics love to cherry-pick overhyped tech from the past and then pretend like it was the only technology investments occurring. It's always the same story about crypto, NFTs, multiverse, then they draw a line to the new thing.

Rewind the clock further and the contrarian play was to talk about how WebVan and Pets.com failed, proving that internet commerce was a fad that was going away. There were so many identical stories about how dumb investors were to be spending money on e-commerce after Pets.com and WebVan proved that nobody wanted to shop online and that delivery was unworkable.

More recently I remember the endless stories about how ride sharing was going to fail and Uber and Lyft were going to disappear after the VC money ran out. There were blogs just like this one predicting that those dumb investors were going to lose all their money on such a stupid idea.

This type of contrarian reporting always operates on a sliding window of recent failures, trying to convince you that the current thing they're on about is identical to past failures

These articles get traction on HN, but when I read them there isn't a coherent argument inside. It's just a collection of different headlines and stories meant to imply that AI is bad across the board and nobody wants it, but there isn't an argument being formed. It's appealing to those who already have the conclusion in mind, but there is no convincing argument in this post

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#19

Post by wiseowise » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:24 PM UTC

mminer237 wrote: post #6

austin-cheney wrote: post #3

Everybody hates tech. Everybody hates tech billionaires. Nobody wants their bullshit. Yes… kind of. I am old and always have been, so naturally I don’t like things I believe children falsely claim they cannot live without. Social media comes to mind.

I wonder if she appreciates the irony of posting that on a website lol

Seriously? Having a blog is now same as dissolving your brain in anxiety driven doom scrolling?

Re: You Do Not, in Fact, Have to Hand It to Them

#20

Post by Mordisquitos » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 2:24 PM UTC

chuckadams wrote: post #2

The argument seems to be that Metaverse was a flop and FB did bad stuff, therefore AI will be a flop. That's certainly ... words.

The argument is that Metaverse, as presented by its billionaire promoters as a paradigm shift, even though the public hated that vision, was a flop, therefore AI as presented by its billionaire promoters as a paradigm shift will be a flop, because the public hates that vision.