121–130 of 155 posts
There are claims that Nvidia will go bust like how Cisco did, but I think Jensen Huang knows what he is doing. https://x.com/all_in_tok/status/1796602545055342784
David Sacks is not an expert on gpu architecture.
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…
1. A competitor might actually make the visionary future a reality, and so, falling behind is a corporate existential crisis
2. They’re nowhere close to making their vision a reality. I think companies knowingly continue to sell a healthy dose of BS to their customers in terms of AI capabilities, but I also think they’ve fooled themselves with their own arrogance. For example, Google learning in realtime with the rest of the world that their AI generated search results are sometimes outputting nonsense.
This is why I value NVIDIA over all software companies. I’m confident the latter group has hyped everything so much that most will eventually fail to meet expectations. NVIDIA just gets to sit back and watch it all play out.
I do think they’ll eventually deserve a $3T valuation some years down the line as models continue to improve and some industries truly get revolutionized.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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.
It's not just physical suffering that she's supposedly immune to. She's also immune to all psychological suffering as well. And she is married, has kids, and is perfectly healthy. If she's in fact the real deal (I don't know this myself, but I haven't seen anyone debunking her) then dismissing her as an outlier would be a remarkable form of complacency. If the effect can be understood and replicated, suffering will become fully as needless as it deserves to be, with its final eradication mourned probably as much as the death of smallpox.
> If LLMs are beating humans in theory of mind tasks, your theory of mind is incorrect.
Or, LLMs have better theory of mind than most humans do, which is the finding of that study. Is it metaphysically impossible? If your mental image of how LLM cognition works is the same type of expert system that Searle was writing about back in the day, it's refreshingly bizarre to read how LLMs appear to work:
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/god-help-us-lets-try-to-und...
Where is the Chinese Room in this? I don't see one. Just a lot of complex and vague conceptual associations mediated through neural connections. Whether or not these models are conscious or have an inner life, they seem to be doing just fine understanding concepts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> To die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly. Death of one's own free choice, death at the proper time, with a clear head and with joyfulness, consummated in the midst of children and witnesses: so that an actual leave-taking is possible while he who is leaving is still there
(Twilight of the Idols, 1888)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market cap is irrational and I submit as evidence Llama 3. AI won’t need huge amounts of computing resources. It will need moderate amounts of computing resources. The huge amount of computing resources seen today are the result of immature technology that uses resources inefficiently. As the technology improves, the capability-per-FLOP will increase and AI will move on-device.
> I submit as evidence Llama 3. Llama 3 has likely costed billions to Meta and most of it went to Nvidia. What are you talking about. As much as what you think inference costs, it is tiny in comparison to training the model.
> Refering - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40593858
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 resu…
This is what people have said about TSLA for like...a decade? And there have been only maybe 3 or 4 good times to short the stock, all obvious in retrospect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main threat to Nvidia is the fact that big clients might start producing their own chips (like Apple is doing and MSFT has started). And they will start offering them to their users who is now leveraging Nvidia's solutions. And AMD and Intel might wake up from coma too. Though Nvidia is trying to pivot towards more cloud and software solutions. Let's see.
> The main threat to Nvidia is the fact that big clients might start producing their own chips (like Apple is doing and MSFT has started). What shovels are Apple and MSFT buying to make their own chips? I mean, who is making Apple's and MSFT's AI chips? I'd buy their stock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Well, if we're taking the stories at face value, Socrates knew what he was getting himself into when he chose to die, even when he could have easily escaped. He died to prove a point. If Nietzsche thinks this is silly, it's one of those times he's at odds with his own philosophy. > To die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly. Death of one's own free choice, death at the proper time, with a clear head…
That really is Nietzsche’s angle on it if you care to go looking rather than cite him at me to disprove what I said. I think it’s in Will to Power but it’s been a while. You’ll also notice throughout that Nietzsche isn’t a dialectical thinker. He doesn’t go round in circles trying to find the antithesis of his polemics – he’s calling it how it is for him.
Edit: some of his perspective on Socrates is in Twilight - Google: Nietzsche Socrates Buffoon.
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 fu…