21–30 of 37 posts
The instructive part about the comparison is that believing "AI is a bubble" doesn't mean saying that AI is worthless. After all, after the dot-com bubble burst the internet still existed and continued to transform the whole world.
This might be interesting, but it reads so strongly like AI slop I had to stop.
Can I ask what makes it read like slop? Because lots of comments here on the style and little on the thinking behind it, which is where I spent my effort. It seems like a lot of folks arguing about rather or not we need to still read code.
The fact that it's slop. People know it when they read it.
Put Claude and other LLMs away (for coding, writing, everything - block them on your firewall fully) for a few days and then write a blog post from scratch using your own words. No asking for help, comments, editing, nothing. Then compare against this. It'll jump out at you.
No, AI isn’t like the dot-com bubble and it’s short sighted that people keep trying to compare it. The dot-com bubble had investment before mass adoption. AI has mass adoption, there are many industries where usage of AI is now expected. They have similarities, but claiming they are the same is so fucking stupid.
It doesn't make a difference, the profitability is way overvalued, potential customer companies are firing and closing all over the world, while AI debt is growing in billions (visualize curves going in opposite directions). They'll never be able to repay them on time. Plus, these investments are based on a promise they'll never uphold since the LLMs are a technological dead end for their ambitions. Yes, there's a bu…
That’s your opinion, for many there are clear patterns of loss-leaders and market capture plays.
> potential customer companies are firing and closing all over the world
I’d wager this is due to economics outside of AI.
> Plus, these investments are based on a promise they'll never uphold since the LLMs are a technological dead end for their ambitions.
More speculation and opinion.
> Yes, there's a bubble and we've known for a while now, thank you.
Ok, so analyze it accordingly instead of lazily calling it the same as the dot-com bubble.
There are some things you’ve said that I agree with (to a limited extent) and others that I do not. I have no interest in slop articles calling it a dot-com bubble, put some effort forward and make the share worthwhile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I ask what makes it read like slop? Because lots of comments here on the style and little on the thinking behind it, which is where I spent my effort. It seems like a lot of folks arguing about rather or not we need to still read code.
> Can I ask what makes it read like slop? The fact that it's slop. People know it when they read it. Put Claude and other LLMs away (for coding, writing, everything - block them on your firewall fully) for a few days and then write a blog post from scratch using your own words. No asking for help, comments, editing, nothing. Then compare against this. It'll jump out at you.
Ok, but (and this is the whole point) where _should_ we use LLMs? Because your comment could easily be said to someone writing code.
If slop === LLM involved, that's too reductive. If LLM does all the work, that's also too reductive.
Was dot com a bubble? If you could transport yourself to the late 90s, would you try to convince people that the internet's impact on the economy would be no greater than that of the fax machine by 2005. Or was it just some companies were overvalued?
Was dot com a bubble? If you could transport yourself to the late 90s, would you try to convince people that the internet's impact on the economy would be no greater than that of the fax machine by 2005. Or was it just some companies were overvalued?
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/quote-of-the-day/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't make a difference, the profitability is way overvalued, potential customer companies are firing and closing all over the world, while AI debt is growing in billions (visualize curves going in opposite directions). They'll never be able to repay them on time. Plus, these investments are based on a promise they'll never uphold since the LLMs are a technological dead end for their ambitions. Yes, there's a bu…
> It doesn't make a difference, the profitability is way overvalued That’s your opinion, for many there are clear patterns of loss-leaders and market capture plays. > potential customer companies are firing and closing all over the world I’d wager this is due to economics outside of AI. > Plus, these investments are based on a promise they'll never uphold since the LLMs are a technological dead end for their ambition…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I ask what makes it read like slop? Because lots of comments here on the style and little on the thinking behind it, which is where I spent my effort. It seems like a lot of folks arguing about rather or not we need to still read code.
> Can I ask what makes it read like slop? The fact that it's slop. People know it when they read it. Put Claude and other LLMs away (for coding, writing, everything - block them on your firewall fully) for a few days and then write a blog post from scratch using your own words. No asking for help, comments, editing, nothing. Then compare against this. It'll jump out at you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can I ask what makes it read like slop? The fact that it's slop. People know it when they read it. Put Claude and other LLMs away (for coding, writing, everything - block them on your firewall fully) for a few days and then write a blog post from scratch using your own words. No asking for help, comments, editing, nothing. Then compare against this. It'll jump out at you.
> Put Claude and other LLMs away for a few days and then write a blog post from scratch using your own words. No asking for help, comments, editing, nothing. Ok, but (and this is the whole point) where _should_ we use LLMs? Because your comment could easily be said to someone writing code. If slop === LLM involved, that's too reductive. If LLM does all the work, that's also too reductive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't make a difference, the profitability is way overvalued, potential customer companies are firing and closing all over the world, while AI debt is growing in billions (visualize curves going in opposite directions). They'll never be able to repay them on time. Plus, these investments are based on a promise they'll never uphold since the LLMs are a technological dead end for their ambitions. Yes, there's a bu…
> It doesn't make a difference, the profitability is way overvalued That’s your opinion, for many there are clear patterns of loss-leaders and market capture plays. > potential customer companies are firing and closing all over the world I’d wager this is due to economics outside of AI. > Plus, these investments are based on a promise they'll never uphold since the LLMs are a technological dead end for their ambition…
You claim I'm just spouting opinions, yet you seem to have miss headlines last year about AI authors/fathers walking out the door claiming just the same... But to you, they're just spouting their own worthless opinion as well.
Please spend a bit of time researching the subject before posting anything here.