Live data from Hacker News

GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

theregister.com

131–140 of 155 posts

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#131

Well run large companies often waste a lot, in order to (1) hedge risks of being left behind, (2) ensure they have options in the future in possible growth or new efficiency areas, and (3) to start on long learning curves for skills and capabilities that appear likely to be a baseline necessity in the long run. Bonfires of money. Predictably. Because all three of those concerns require highly speculative action to pr…

You're giving company executives way too much credit in general. I'm sure there are unicorns out there where conscientious stewards of the company's long-term health are making measured, rational choices that may pay off in a decade, but it's a tiny minority of companies. Most are run by narcissistic short-term corporate raiders whose first priority is looting the company for their own profit and second priority is cosplaying as a once-in-a-generation genius "thought leader" in a never-ending battle to beat away the nagging (and correct) thought that they're nepo-babies who have no clue what they're doing. These morons are burning money because they are stupid and/or because it benefits them and their buddies in the short-term. They burned money on blockchain bullshit, they burned money on Web 2.0 bullshit, they are burning money on AI, and they will be burning money on the next fad too. The fact that AI might actually turn out to be something real is complete serendipity; it has nothing to do with their insight or foresight. The only reason they ever look smart is because they're great at taking credit for every win, everyone else immediately forgets all their losses, and op-ed writers and internet simps all compete to write the most sycophantic adulations of their brilliance. They could start finger-painting their office windows with their own feces and the Wall Street Journal would pump out op-eds saying "Here's why smearing poop on your windows is actually a Really Brilliant Business Move made by Really Good-Looking Business Winners!" Just go back and re-read your comment but think "blockchain" instead of "AI" and you'll see clearly how silly and sycophantic it really is.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#132
post #125
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one knew what “blockchain” was, how it worked, or what could be used for. Not the blockchain itself, but the concept of an immutable, append only, tamper-proof ledger underpinning it is a very useful one in many contexts where the question of authenticity of datasets arises – the blockchain has given us a ledger database. The ledger database is more than just a hash as it also provides a cryptographic proof that…

I often feel that immutability is very much over-rated and goes against real word. Lot of legal system is build on reverting things. Thus things being harder to revert is not actually desirable property.

No. Official and legal records detest the in place changes, love a full history of changes, and also love to walk the entire history of changes back. You do not have to convince me, you can talk to the state auditors instead to get their perspective.

Consider two simple and common scenarios (there are more): citizenship certificates and the recognition of prior learning.

1. Citizenship – the person with the name of Joanna Doe in the birth certificate was issued with a citizenship certificate in the same name. As time goes by, Joanna Doe changes the legal name to Joanna Smith; the citizenship certificate is reissued with the new legal name. We do not want to truly update the existing record in the citizenship database and simply change Doe -> Smith as it will create a mismatch with the name in the birth certificate. If we use a ledger database, an update operation will create a new revision of the same record and all subsequent simple query operations will return the latest updated revision with the new name. The first revision, however, will still be retained in the table's cryptographically verifiable audit/history log.

Why should we care? Because Joanna Smith can accidentally throw their new citizenship certificate away and later they will want to renew their passport (or the driver's licence). The citizenship certificate may be restored[0] by presenting the birth certificate in the original name and the current or expired passport, but the passport is in the new name. From a random system's point of view, Joanna Doe and Joanna Smith are two distinct individuals with no apparent link between them. However, the ledger database can provide proof that it is the same person indeed because the unabridged history of name changes is available, it can be queried and relied upon.

2. Recognition of prior learning – a person has been awarded a degree at institution A. Credits from Institution A contributed to a degree at Institution B. The degree at B is revoked due to issues with source evidence (i.e. Institution A). The ledger database makes such ripple effects deterministic – a revocation event at B triggers rules that re-evaluate dependent awards and enrolments at partners, with a verifiable trail of who was notified and when. If Institution A later corrects its own records, Institution B and downstream bodies can attach a superseding record rather than overwrite, preserving full lineage. The entire drama unfolded will always be available.

2½. Recognition of prior learning (bonus) – an employer verified the degree on the hiring date. Months later it is revoked. The employer can present a ledger proof that, on the hiring date, the credential existed and was valid. It reduces dispute risk and supports fair-use decisions such as probation reviews rather than immediate termination.

All this stuff is very real and the right tech stack (i.e. the ledger DB) reduces the complexity tremendously.

[0] Different jurisdictions have different rules but the procedure is more or less similar amongst them.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#133
post #131

Well run large companies often waste a lot, in order to (1) hedge risks of being left behind, (2) ensure they have options in the future in possible growth or new efficiency areas, and (3) to start on long learning curves for skills and capabilities that appear likely to be a baseline necessity in the long run. Bonfires of money. Predictably. Because all three of those concerns require highly speculative action to pr…

You're giving company executives way too much credit in general. I'm sure there are unicorns out there where conscientious stewards of the company's long-term health are making measured, rational choices that may pay off in a decade, but it's a tiny minority of companies. Most are run by narcissistic short-term corporate raiders whose first priority is looting the company for their own profit and second priority is c…

> Well run large companies [...]

Yes, of course. Incompetent leaders do incompetent things.

No argument or surprise.

The point I made was less obvious. Competent leaders can also/often appear to throw money away, but for solid reasons.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very much relevant. The definition of the ledger database includes immutability of datasets as a hard constraint[0][1]. The mere fact that the git commit history can be altered automatically disqualifies git from being an acceptable alternative to the ledger database in highly regulated environments. If strict compliance is not a hard requirement (open source project are the prime example), git can be used to prove p…

It is immutable in exactly the same way. The git commit history cannot by altered, except in the same sense that you could manually edit the backing store of a blockchain to alter the data, and with the same consequence that the alteration would be instantly noticeable in either case.

I respectfully disagree.

Consider a leaf commit (or a leaf which is a subtree of commits). I am a person with nefarious intentions, and I delete the leaf commit, forcefully expire the reflogs, or force garbage collect them. At that point, there is no longer remaining evidence in git that the commit ever existed. If git were to be used to record a history of criminal offences, I would be able to single-handedly delete the last offence by running «git reflog expire --expire=now --all» followed by «git gc --aggressive --prune=now».

Ledger databases, on the other hand, do not have the «delete» operation. The «update» operation does not factually update the document/record and creates a new revision instead (just as git does), whilst retaining a full history of updates to the document/record. This is the fundamental difference.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is immutable in exactly the same way. The git commit history cannot by altered, except in the same sense that you could manually edit the backing store of a blockchain to alter the data, and with the same consequence that the alteration would be instantly noticeable in either case.

I respectfully disagree. Consider a leaf commit (or a leaf which is a subtree of commits). I am a person with nefarious intentions, and I delete the leaf commit, forcefully expire the reflogs, or force garbage collect them. At that point, there is no longer remaining evidence in git that the commit ever existed. If git were to be used to record a history of criminal offences, I would be able to single-handedly delete…

If you're running a blockchain on a single node, it's exactly like running Git on that single node. You can mutate the data locally, even with something as simple as reverting to a backup. Voila, it never happened.

If you're running Git on multiple nodes, it's exactly like running a blockchain on multiple nodes. You can mutate your own local copy, but that doesn't mutate mine, and the set of commits is functionally identical to the union of commits from every node. You can't delete a commit without deleting it from every clone.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#137
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is missing even in this article is the install and expected failure rate of the dominant GB300 servers. Numbers I heard were, "~15% annual failure and it's not worth trying to swap/repair". That means in 5 years these entire installs are down more than half. Of course they can install the NEW GX500turbo servers which are 4x the compute, but 2x more power hungry. How much will that cost? What is the hyperscaler w…

The article is right to focus on the end customer and not on the hyperscalars. The hyperscalars are not the ones having trouble generating income. They have plenty of paying customers. They certainly understand capital depreciation and the need to refresh hardware. Premature hardware failure will be charged back to Nvidia who are not exactly struggling for cash either.

You don't charge back to your supplier, and expect to get the next allocation of servers.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#138
post #76

Well, at least AI is going to be better than the blockchain hype. No one knew what “blockchain” was, how it worked, or what could be used for. I had a very hard time explaining once you put something in the chain, you can’t easily pull it back out. If you wanted to verify documents, all you have to do is put a hash in a database table. Which we already had. It has exactly one purpose: prevent any single entity from c…

> No one knew what “blockchain” was, how it worked, or what could be used for. Not the blockchain itself, but the concept of an immutable, append only, tamper-proof ledger underpinning it is a very useful one in many contexts where the question of authenticity of datasets arises – the blockchain has given us a ledger database. The ledger database is more than just a hash as it also provides a cryptographic proof that…

> but the concept of an immutable, append only, tamper-proof ledger underpinning it is a very useful one

Which is why blockchains have become such a ubiquitous technology. They're literally everywhere. Can't swing a cat without hitting a blockchain nowadays.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#139
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is right to focus on the end customer and not on the hyperscalars. The hyperscalars are not the ones having trouble generating income. They have plenty of paying customers. They certainly understand capital depreciation and the need to refresh hardware. Premature hardware failure will be charged back to Nvidia who are not exactly struggling for cash either.

You don't charge back to your supplier, and expect to get the next allocation of servers.

Not sure why you would think that. Nobody is going to pass up on a hyperscalarer because they had a 15% charge back. Margins are well over 50% and you get paid for every sale while high failure rates are a different departments problem.

Re: GenAI FOMO has spurred businesses to light nearly $40B on fire

#140

Well run large companies often waste a lot, in order to (1) hedge risks of being left behind, (2) ensure they have options in the future in possible growth or new efficiency areas, and (3) to start on long learning curves for skills and capabilities that appear likely to be a baseline necessity in the long run. Bonfires of money. Predictably. Because all three of those concerns require highly speculative action to pr…

> Well run large companies

I've never heard of such a thing

Post reply on HN