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

Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 228 posts

Re: Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

#111

Post by keyringlight »

Spooky23 wrote: post #97
malfist wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the people who bought a lot of shovels during the gold rush thought they were making the smartest money move

Dude, I'm getting a shovel factory for practically nothing. I'm easily realizing 5x value on that investment. I'd say for an estate that I am the executor of, it probably saved me $50k in legal fees and other expenses because it helped me analyze a novel problem and organize it ask the right questions of counsel. Another scenario i had to deal with i needed a mobile app to do something very specific for a few weeks.…

I'd wonder how much that scales up though for the benefit of the companies that are each investing hundreds of billions and hope to see a net return. How many developers like you (presumably less of you seeing as each is more productive) or enterprises you work for paying fees (along with slimming down legacy costs paid to someone) does it take to get up in the 12 digit range?

Re: Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

#115

Post by keeda »

tempodox wrote: post #110
keeda wrote: post #106

This will sound pedantic but I'll explain why it matters: the exact wording is "We need to do something useful with AI", because the current (editorialized) submission title (of an already slanted article) makes it sound like people don't know what to do with AI. We already know many useful things to do; there are already 10,000 startups (9789 out of YC alone, 4423 of which are coding-related) doing various ostensibl…

The number of startups is no proof they’re doing anything useful. It only proves that the founders think they can make money with it.

And potentially their investors, for the startups that got funding. And maybe their customers, for the startups that are already hitting millions in ARR in a year or less. There are some of the numbers out there worth looking up.

Is your contention that we don't already know how to do useful things with AI?

Re: Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

#117

Post by wolvoleo »

api wrote: post #30

Energy doesn’t take “social permission,” but it costs money. Translation for this is: we need to make AI make money or the bubble will collapse. I’ve been predicting for a while: free or cheap AI will enshittify and become an addictive ad medium with nerfed capabilities. If you want actually good AI you will have to pay for it, either a much heftier fee or buying or renting compute to run your own. In other words you…

It does take social permission in places like Europe. There's a big pressure against datacenters here that use scarce resources. Like here in Holland the power grid is overloaded and companies need to wait for ages to get a connection.

So this is something that factors in hugely in planning permission. What do we get back for it is a question asked a lot. And datacenters are notoriously bad at providing jobs, during construction yes but in the run phase it's mainly low-value remote hands and security stuff.

Re: Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

#118

Post by blibble »

Spooky23 wrote: post #92
blibble wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that $400/month is essentially the introductory price, subsided in an attempt to grab market share that $400 will go up by at least a factor of 10 once the bubble pops would you be prepared to pay $4000/month?

Nah, I'll move much of it locally when it becomes cost justified to do so. I doubt that the exponential cost explosion day is coming. When the bubble pops, the bankruptcies of many of the players will push the costs down. US policy has provided a powerful incentive for Chinese players to do what Google has done and have a lower cost delivery model anyway.

it's not exponential, it's linear

> the bankruptcies of many of the players will push the costs down

the running costs don't disappear because people go broke

Re: Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

#119

Post by orangea »

keeda wrote: post #106

This will sound pedantic but I'll explain why it matters: the exact wording is "We need to do something useful with AI", because the current (editorialized) submission title (of an already slanted article) makes it sound like people don't know what to do with AI. We already know many useful things to do; there are already 10,000 startups (9789 out of YC alone, 4423 of which are coding-related) doing various ostensibl…

> We already know many useful things to do; there are already 10,000 startups (9789 out of YC alone, 4423 of which are coding-related) doing various ostensibly useful things.

I don't think you meant "ostensibly".

Re: Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI"

#120

Post by brewdad »

Spooky23 wrote: post #92
blibble wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that $400/month is essentially the introductory price, subsided in an attempt to grab market share that $400 will go up by at least a factor of 10 once the bubble pops would you be prepared to pay $4000/month?

Nah, I'll move much of it locally when it becomes cost justified to do so. I doubt that the exponential cost explosion day is coming. When the bubble pops, the bankruptcies of many of the players will push the costs down. US policy has provided a powerful incentive for Chinese players to do what Google has done and have a lower cost delivery model anyway.

It's the dot com bubble all over again. When you are losing money on every transaction you can't make it up on volume.
Post reply on HN