131–140 of 668 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then it’s a market for lemons. Buyers can’t (or choose not to) tell a good AI idea from a bad one.
A market for lemons means there is an information asymmetry. Sellers know what they have and try to offload their lemons on clueless buyers. I don't think that's the case here.
The big question is what "society" he is talking about? Is it the "society" that includes all people, or the "society" that includes only rich people?
ChatGPT currently has ~ 120 to 190 million daily active users ~ 800 million weekly active users ~ 450 million to over 800 million depending on the data source and methodology. Get a grip. Hundreds of millions of people are using it, most of them for free. I would say "society" has benefited. This has to be peak HN. Create the fastest growing consumer product in history. HN anon: yes, but who will benefit?
My understanding is that the cost of training each next model is very very large, and a half trained model is worthless. Thus when it is realised that this investment cannot produce the necessary returns, there will simply be no next model. People will continue using the old models, but they will become more and more out of date, and less and less useful, until they are not much more than historical artifacts. My poi…
If they stop getting returns in intelligence, they will switch to returns in efficiency and focus on integration, with new models being trained for new data cutoffs if nothing else. Even today there is at least a 5-10 year integration/adoption period if everything halts tomorrow. There is no reality in which LLMs go away (shy of being replaced).
If it costs $10B to add 1 year of data to an existing model, every year, that doesn’t sound too good.
My understanding is that the cost of training each next model is very very large, and a half trained model is worthless. Thus when it is realised that this investment cannot produce the necessary returns, there will simply be no next model. People will continue using the old models, but they will become more and more out of date, and less and less useful, until they are not much more than historical artifacts. My poi…
If they stop getting returns in intelligence, they will switch to returns in efficiency and focus on integration, with new models being trained for new data cutoffs if nothing else. Even today there is at least a 5-10 year integration/adoption period if everything halts tomorrow. There is no reality in which LLMs go away (shy of being replaced).
I don't think we can assume that people producing what appear to be addictive services are going to do that, especially when they seem to be addicted themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT currently has ~ 120 to 190 million daily active users ~ 800 million weekly active users ~ 450 million to over 800 million depending on the data source and methodology. Get a grip. Hundreds of millions of people are using it, most of them for free. I would say "society" has benefited. This has to be peak HN. Create the fastest growing consumer product in history. HN anon: yes, but who will benefit?
Facebook has more. Was it a benefit? Does the benefit outweigh the harms?
The question is, what are billions of people doing on Facebook if it's harmful? I don't know. My daycare sends me updates, my barbershop tells me when they're closing and I used it to sell my fridge.
This hole Facebook irrational hate is ridiculously overblown. It's an app, and compared to things like TikTok that is essentially a Chinese psy-op, it's really a great product.
Every bubble looks obvious in hindsight. The dot-com crash left behind Amazon and Google. The crypto crash left behind Coinbase and a few real revenue generating companies. If this is the AI bubble, then the survivors are going to look very obvious in a decade, we just don’t know which ones yet.
A lot of us clocked the crypto bullshit waaaay before the crash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest problem is the infrastructure left behind from the Dotcom boom that laid the path for the current world (the high speed fiber) doesn't translate to computer chips. Are you still using intel chips from 1998? And the chips are such a huge cost, and being backed by debt but they depreciate in value exponentially. It's not the same because so much of the current debt fueled spending is on an asset that has ve…
And a lot of the gains from the Dotcom boom are being paid back in negative value for the average person at this point. We have automated systems that waste our time when we need support, product features that should have a one-time-cost being turned into subscriptions, a complete usurping of the ability to distribute software or build compatible replacements, etc.. The Dotcom boom was probably good for everyone in s…
This shouldn't be a surprise - capitalism always overshoots. Anything worth investing in will generally receive too much investment in because very few people can tell where the line is. And that's what causes bubbles but at this point it should be clear that AI will make a substantial impact - at least as great as the internet, likely larger