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

'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 177 posts

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#141

Post by secretsatan »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #71
Sharlin wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, that’s not exactly a new thing, it’s just sensitive to the exact phase of the Great AI Freeze/Thaw Cycle. A lot of now-ordinary automation used to be "AI" until it become commonplace and no longer buzzword-worthy and thus no longer regarded as "AI", and/or an AI winter hit. Last time that AI was big before DL it was the "big data" fad and everything had to be big data. Marketing has never not been about h…

I understand why companies try to brand themselves as the latest and greatest tech innovation. What I don't understand is why it works or who falls for it. It's quite trivial to determine whether or not this is e.g. transformer-based AI. I remember in the years before the pandemic that I would joke that all you had to do was "sprinkle in some blockchain" to your VC pitch and your valuation would automatically go up b…

I think just the co opting of the word intelligence is the bigger con.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#142

Post by thunky »

salawat wrote: post #115
thunky wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're being downvoted because you appear to be not asking genuinely I literally said I was asking genuinely. It's either one of two reasons imo: 1. Their son hates "ai slop" and doesn't think AI is useful. 2. Their son is afraid of not being employable. I see #1 the most here. But I suspect it's a front because the posters don't want to admit #2. Hence my question. I figured it's easier for someone to admit someon…

>But I suspect it's a front because the posters don't want to admit #2. Hence my question. And that's why you're getting reflexively downvoted. Because we can already tell by the way you telegraphed the question you aren't worth wasting time on. As it turns out, some of us don't think our youth shouldn't be able to have the same opportunities we did because a bunch of techies got the financial sector to go all in on…

Fine you're in bucket #2.

Interesting how those who are united against AI have diverse reasons.

> Because we can already tell by the way you telegraphed the question you aren't worth wasting time on.

Nobody asked me before accusing me of bad intentions like you did, but I'll say anyway:

I think using technology to reduce human effort is entirely the point. I believe our economy needs to adapt to advancement, not the other way around. Not that it's going to be easy, but the anti-tech crowd are going to lose. You can't stop progress.

I know, an extreme philosophy to see on a tech forum.

I say this as someone who used AI to assist with real estate and legal issues recently with great success. And as a coder by trade that no longer writes code. And I'm amazed that anyone could say it's not amazing technology.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#143

Post by dodu_ »

recursive wrote: post #106
techblueberry wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see AI marketing as a negative indicator. Because everyone should be doing AI it’s not a differentiator. It implicitly means you don’t know what value you provide. It’s like advertising you’re cloud powered because you use AWS. Which makes recall a bunch of companies doing. What value do you provide, not what tech do you use.

> everyone should be doing AI I don't understand this at all. I'd consider a no AI message a positive signal. Like what bandcamp is doing.

It's funny how many of the startup-pilled HN crowd have completely abandoned the widely accepted principles like "solve a real problem" or "make something people want" in favor of solution-first thinking "how can I shove AI into something" which was always looked down upon.

This industry has lost its collective mind with this hype cycle. I'm not even against the technology, but this is all just shockingly reckless.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#144

Post by h4kunamata »

The house of cards is falling already, if you are an user/consumer, more and more are rejecting anything with AI in it.

Once that affects people taking the blue pill, and that is happening fast, products and services with AI in it will have no public interest.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#145

Post by surgical_fire »

thunky wrote: post #140
surgical_fire wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that was your stance, the question was never genuine. When you ask a question expecting a certain outcome, you are obviously not very curious about the answer. Also, HN is a somewhat large community. I am skeptical about AI for neither reason you mentioned - I think it's a deadend technology and the economics make no sense. A ridiculous waste of resources sucking up all the oxygen in the room. I don't really care…

> When you ask a question expecting a certain outcome, you are obviously not very curious about the answer. That's an absurd take imo. So you fall into bucket #1. More generally that AI isn't useful. At least not useful enough to invest time or money in. Which kindof shows that my question was reasonable. Multiple people on this thread have answered differently. But still a lot of hostility and anti-tech sentiment.

> So you fall into bucket #1. More generally that AI isn't useful. At least not useful enough to invest time or money in.

Wrong. That's what you wanted to read. As I was saying you are not interested in my opinion, only on the answer you already presume.

I think AI is moderately useful, although clearly not as useful as it is hyped to be.

The amount of money poured into AI makes no sense not because it has no value, but because the investment will never see an adequate return.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#146

Post by disqard »

dodu_ wrote: post #143
recursive wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone should be doing AI I don't understand this at all. I'd consider a no AI message a positive signal. Like what bandcamp is doing.

It's funny how many of the startup-pilled HN crowd have completely abandoned the widely accepted principles like "solve a real problem" or "make something people want" in favor of solution-first thinking "how can I shove AI into something" which was always looked down upon. This industry has lost its collective mind with this hype cycle. I'm not even against the technology, but this is all just shockingly reckless.

I'm not advocating for being this way... but if you're starting a company primarily so you can have an "exit strategy", then it is natural to primarily virtue-signal to Wall St (instead of "solve a real problem")

tl;dr: this AI cargo-culting is ultimately unsurprising to me.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#148

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dodu_ wrote: post #143
recursive wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone should be doing AI I don't understand this at all. I'd consider a no AI message a positive signal. Like what bandcamp is doing.

It's funny how many of the startup-pilled HN crowd have completely abandoned the widely accepted principles like "solve a real problem" or "make something people want" in favor of solution-first thinking "how can I shove AI into something" which was always looked down upon. This industry has lost its collective mind with this hype cycle. I'm not even against the technology, but this is all just shockingly reckless.

To be fair, there is a lot of acquisition capital looking for plays to throw at a wall and see if it sticks. The set of start-ups explicitly built as features, not standalone products, has always legitimately been non-zero. And when you get concentrations of acquisition capital, like we have now among the AI majors, you’ll see preference for that—versus the traditional product mode-of start-up.

Building a proper product is still good advice. But if you think you can slip that and flip a feature into a quick sale, that’s a higher ROI.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#149

Post by dodu_ »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #148
dodu_ wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how many of the startup-pilled HN crowd have completely abandoned the widely accepted principles like "solve a real problem" or "make something people want" in favor of solution-first thinking "how can I shove AI into something" which was always looked down upon. This industry has lost its collective mind with this hype cycle. I'm not even against the technology, but this is all just shockingly reckless.

To be fair, there is a lot of acquisition capital looking for plays to throw at a wall and see if it sticks. The set of start-ups explicitly built as features, not standalone products, has always legitimately been non-zero. And when you get concentrations of acquisition capital, like we have now among the AI majors, you’ll see preference for that—versus the traditional product mode-of start-up. Building a proper prod…

I dunno, making a "feature" that provides dubious-at-best value in hopes that potential buyers are currently so blinded by the hype they'll fall for a wider range of bullshit than normal so I can slip one by them and leave them holding the bag while I ride off into the sunset with millions seems like it could be pretty accurately described as a scam.

I guess people can dress it up as business savvy and market timing or whatever pretentious lingo they want to make themselves feel better about it, but it's really just scamming by another name.

But we're in the Scam/Grift Economy now anyway so I guess everyone is trying to get theirs while they still can, and I guess that's what we're seeing.

Re: 'AI washing': firms are scrambling to rebrand themselves as tech-focused

#150

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dodu_ wrote: post #149
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, there is a lot of acquisition capital looking for plays to throw at a wall and see if it sticks. The set of start-ups explicitly built as features, not standalone products, has always legitimately been non-zero. And when you get concentrations of acquisition capital, like we have now among the AI majors, you’ll see preference for that—versus the traditional product mode-of start-up. Building a proper prod…

I dunno, making a "feature" that provides dubious-at-best value in hopes that potential buyers are currently so blinded by the hype they'll fall for a wider range of bullshit than normal so I can slip one by them and leave them holding the bag while I ride off into the sunset with millions seems like it could be pretty accurately described as a scam. I guess people can dress it up as business savvy and market timing…

> making a "feature" that provides dubious-at-best value in hopes that potential buyers are currently so blinded by the hype

That’s not how these businesses are best built. Instead, the founders tend to look at what an industry should be doing, but due to incumbent politics hasn’t been able to. You build the thing from the outside, bypassing those politics. Once you have it, you’re parachuted in.

> it's really just scamming by another name

There is plenty of this in bullshit-product companies, too. At the end of the day, a bolt-on exit strategy is absolutely legitimate. Most people can’t execute on it because it requires understanding both the economic niche and high-level corporate politics at a few major players. So there is probably more noise in feature-only startups than in the broader startup ecosystem. But again, most startups fail for good reason.

Post reply on HN