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

Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 155 posts

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#101

Post by latchkey »

gizajob wrote: post #5

Question for HNers: Do you think that AI is having a big enough impact already to generate this valuation? Is it changing your life? And do you think all of Nvidia’s customers throwing money at data centres full of GPUs will cause the current generation of AIs (LLMs etc) to deliver greater and greater returns, sufficient to make Nvidia worth this current valuation and more? WalMart’s market cap is $540billion. Would…

> Question for HNers: Do you think that AI is having a big enough impact already to generate this valuation? Is it changing your life?

Imagine asking these questions in the early 90's when "the web" was just getting started. Or when bitcoin was $0.10.

These are the sorts of headlines people make fun of later on, “The internet is just a fad.”

People learned their lessons and are way more willing to make bets on the future. Right now, clearly this is AI.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#102

Post by gizajob »

N0b8ez wrote: post #98
gizajob wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a few different ways one can look at it if trying to take lessons and ideas from Wittgenstein. I didn’t do a brilliant job of the thesis to be honest… but I got a few things on an intuitive level from trying to grok a bunch of Wittgenstein that left me feeling like there was a serious problem in our attempts to build an AI. One of them is that we only have language with which to build an AI - language and sym…

>AGI would have to suffer to become general enough to warrant the use of the word general. Jo Cameron doesn't have general intelligence? This seems absurd. Intelligence is orthogonal to phenomenology and affective states. People aren't worried about AGI because it might have a Cartesian theater, the worry is that it might be more competent than humans and put humans out of a job. The semantics of whether it "truly" h…

If LLMs are beating humans in theory of mind tasks, your theory of mind is incorrect.

I’d not heard of Jo Cameron but one outlier, for me, wouldn’t hyper-negate the whole idea out of existence. A huge amount of what I suffer with is not physical pain.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#103

Post by gizajob »

N0b8ez wrote: post #93
gizajob wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but Socrates mostly just spent all day convincing people they were stupid.

I tend to admire that Socrates used arguments in the process of that, unlike both of us right now.

I really dig Socrates, and his arguments. I also dig Nietzsche for pointing out “he was a buffoon who got himself killed”. Dialectics is useful up to the point you start going round in circles and that is as far as most ever get with it.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#104

Post by FreakLegion »

dvt wrote: post #91
FreakLegion wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Searle's arguments aren't that broad. If you're thinking of the Chinese Room, the point there is simply that computation isn't understanding. It's not a claim that AGI is nonsense in principle , and in fact most of these older arguments are narrowly scoped to GOFAI. Of course nobody serious thinks LLMs have minds, either, but unless you believe in ghosts it's hard to make a case that human-like AGI shouldn't ultimate…

> unless you believe in ghosts it's hard to make a case that human-like AGI shouldn't ultimately be possible The argument that any non-materialist position (panpsychism, substance dualism, monadism, etc.) must "believe in ghosts" is comically reductive. Metaphysics is a thing, you know. So is moral philosophy. I mean, heck, so is logic. In all these subfields, arguing that their respective first principles are purely…

> The argument that any non-materialist position (panpsychism, substance dualism, monadism, etc.) must "believe in ghosts" is comically reductive.

"Ghost in the machine" is from Ryle. It's quite apropos here.

> You're playing a semantic game here; but in any case, understanding is a function of intelligence, so (working backwards), you're actually shooting yourself in the foot, anyway.

I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make.

To recap, you said that:

1. You don't believe in this AGI nonsense.

2. Searle elaborated on why AGI is nonsense in the 80s.

And I am clarifying for you that:

1. Searle did not elaborate on why AGI is nonsense in the 80s. He doesn't claim that AGI is nonsense at all.

2. His arguments are specific to the methods that were called AI, and a bunch of technical and philosophical claims about those methods and about the human mind, at the time he was writing. Ditto for Dreyfus.

What you can get Searle to commit to is the idea that human-like AGI can't be a program executed on computers as we think of them today. He's an ultra-materialist, like Ryle, and thinks the physical reality of brains is essential to the minds they produce. To make a mind, you need to make a brain. (In other words, he thinks "Lena" is nonsense: https://qntm.org/mmacevedo.)

So he would say that ChatGPT is no closer to being human-like AGI than ELIZA was, since it's no closer to having something like a human brain, and if all you meant by "the whole AGI nonsense" is that ChatGPT isn't a step toward human-like AGI, then he'd agree. But he wouldn't say that human-like AGI itself is nonsense, precisely because he doesn't believe in ghosts.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#105

Post by gizajob »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #92
gizajob wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but the growth happens over months - the shorting will be done in a couple of intense days.

Good luck timing it. Shorting because it's dropping and then covering when it's going up how you end up losing money. By the time you see the short opportunity, or the opportunity to cover, it's too late. It's just like buying because something is going up and selling when it starts going down. It's a recipe for buying high and selling low.

Sure is. Nvidia buyers right now couldn’t be buying any higher though, and they’re still buying. I get a feeling like the shorting opportunities will be apparent when they present themselves. I’m not looking to put my house on shorting it down any time soon though, but I’ll be surprised if there isn’t some big corrections and market pain in the next 12 months the way this is going. And if not 12 months, then the results day where Jensen doesn’t report a beat-the-street record quarter is going to be a bad day for the price, whenever that day comes.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#106

Post by dvt »

FreakLegion wrote: post #104
dvt wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless you believe in ghosts it's hard to make a case that human-like AGI shouldn't ultimately be possible The argument that any non-materialist position (panpsychism, substance dualism, monadism, etc.) must "believe in ghosts" is comically reductive. Metaphysics is a thing, you know. So is moral philosophy. I mean, heck, so is logic. In all these subfields, arguing that their respective first principles are purely…

> The argument that any non-materialist position (panpsychism, substance dualism, monadism, etc.) must "believe in ghosts" is comically reductive. "Ghost in the machine" is from Ryle. It's quite apropos here. > You're playing a semantic game here; but in any case, understanding is a function of intelligence, so (working backwards), you're actually shooting yourself in the foot, anyway. I honestly don't know what poin…

Just to clarify, I disagree that materialism is the one true way (re: your "believe in ghosts" quip), even though I'm quite aware that Searle is not a cartesian dualist (which is why I made the comment about what our "brains do"). Philosophy of mind-wise, I'm much more in line with folks like Chalmers, though not fully bought in there, either.

And yes, by "AGI nonsense" I meant that "ChatGPT isn't a step toward human-like AGI" since the main chatter these days is about how ChatGPT/Claude/etc. is the harbinger of AGI. I think Searle's argument is particularly strong because you don't even have to believe in something "spooky" happening in our heads. In fact, I'd probably extend "AGI nonsense" to "AGI is flat out not possible" but that's more of a hunch and the full argument invokes things like the non-computability of various physical phenomena.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#107

Post by st380752143 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #21
alberth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wasn't a quick success ... Jensen started Nvidia 31-years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia

I can’t believe I didn’t know until today that Nvidia remains founder lead.

Which big companies in Silicon Valley are still led by their founders?

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#108

Post by MuffinFlavored »

gizajob wrote: post #5

Question for HNers: Do you think that AI is having a big enough impact already to generate this valuation? Is it changing your life? And do you think all of Nvidia’s customers throwing money at data centres full of GPUs will cause the current generation of AIs (LLMs etc) to deliver greater and greater returns, sufficient to make Nvidia worth this current valuation and more? WalMart’s market cap is $540billion. Would…

> Is it changing your life?

According to the mainstream media, AI is supposed to replace me / make me obsolete within 5 years.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#109

Post by IncreasePosts »

thefaux wrote: post #7
blackhawkC17 wrote: post #2

Five years ago, Jensen Huang was worth $3 billion. Now he's worth sub $100 billion. Must be nice to go from Scrooge McDuck to ruler-of-the-universe level. 1- https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/05/28/nvidia-ceo...

I don't know. There are some benefits to be sure, but I figure that above some threshold (and 3B is definitely above that threshold) it becomes difficult to make new friends without worrying about their ulterior motives.

I'm sure any billionaire has that issue. The biggest plus to $3B vs $100B is you can sell stock and buy all your fun toys without risking loss of control of your company.

Re: Nvidia hits $3T market cap on back of AI boom

#110

Post by partiallypro »

Nvidia's value is in its software. CUDA is where the money is and why their chips sell. On paper AMD chips are just as good, sometimes better, but AMD/Radeon software and drivers are awful and have been awful for well over 20 years. That is probably moated for a few years still. I do think the stock is grossly overvalued, but that doesn't always matter, it can still go up. I would be surprised for it to surpass Microsoft and then go on a breather.
Post reply on HN