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

The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

danielmiessler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#31

Post by another_twist »

Atlas667 wrote: post #24
harryf wrote: post #10

Better to talk about the Gartner Hype cycle and it's stages compare it to technologies that clearly followed that cycle such as; - Virtual Reality: big hype in the early 90s (arcades, movies like Lawnmower Man) through to use cases today like surgical training, aviation training - Mobile video calls: hyped in early 2000's with 3G and pre-iPhone devices. Actually took off with 4G and 5G plus iOS and Android phones - 3…

> Looking back at 2025 we'll be saying "Remember when they said everyone would lose their jobs to AI..." Even if... one would think that a capitalist economy would do great with more and capable workers. One would think that more stuff would get done. Right? I think there is a good chance that it will, in fact, shift millions towards unemployment. I am pro technology, yet technology in the hands of profit seekers wil…

I dont know if we can draw parallels to something that happened hundred years ago. Since then there has been increases automation yet the unemployment rate esp in the US hasnt budged beyond 4% barring the depression years. I think access to education and opportunities to upskill are crucial for maintaining a sustainable economy. Its helps people just move on esp if they are of working age. With the industrial revolution, technology was hard to get your hands on. You couldnt just buy a cotton mill and start your own business. Not so with AI, for 20 dollars a month you can get access to an employee that mever gets tired. I think if anything, AI might lead to increased competition among businesses and force monopolies to wake from their slumber.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#32

Post by danielrm26 »

grzracz wrote: post #14

I really dislike the title and the article. You are basically stating that AI is not a bubble, but everything around AI is a bubble, which people obviously mean when they say AI is a bubble. Same was the case with dot com crash, where people didn't LITERALLY mean .com domains would crash, but everything around the domains (& Internet) would crash. Does not help that the author is overinvested into the AI space.

It's like the entire thing was written just for you.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#33

Post by philipallstar »

Atlas667 wrote: post #24
harryf wrote: post #10

Better to talk about the Gartner Hype cycle and it's stages compare it to technologies that clearly followed that cycle such as; - Virtual Reality: big hype in the early 90s (arcades, movies like Lawnmower Man) through to use cases today like surgical training, aviation training - Mobile video calls: hyped in early 2000's with 3G and pre-iPhone devices. Actually took off with 4G and 5G plus iOS and Android phones - 3…

> Looking back at 2025 we'll be saying "Remember when they said everyone would lose their jobs to AI..." Even if... one would think that a capitalist economy would do great with more and capable workers. One would think that more stuff would get done. Right? I think there is a good chance that it will, in fact, shift millions towards unemployment. I am pro technology, yet technology in the hands of profit seekers wil…

Capitalism has lifted a billion+ people out of poverty by efficiently allocating capital instead of mindlessly "employing" people.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#34

Post by utyop22 »

philipallstar wrote: post #33
Atlas667 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looking back at 2025 we'll be saying "Remember when they said everyone would lose their jobs to AI..." Even if... one would think that a capitalist economy would do great with more and capable workers. One would think that more stuff would get done. Right? I think there is a good chance that it will, in fact, shift millions towards unemployment. I am pro technology, yet technology in the hands of profit seekers wil…

Capitalism has lifted a billion+ people out of poverty by efficiently allocating capital instead of mindlessly "employing" people.

The nature of poverty is relative and its definition within a territory is a moving target.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#35

Post by utyop22 »

mergy wrote: post #5

I appreciate the author trying to address this. The only issue is the author didn't define what 'pops' in the bubble. The 'what' that pops, probably, IMHO, is the investment and resources ecosystem dumped, poured, thrown, redirected, etc. to AI. Just like the .com boom, the costs and money thrown at AI are outsized and will 'pop" as it matures. A 'pop" and leveling down to something perhaps not so outrageous is comin…

Im not convinced at the comparison to the .com boom of the internet, its intellectually lazy.

The internet was always going to disrupt the way we think about the discovery and purchase of goods and services at the bare minimum. Some saw that the role of the personal computer was evolving from just computation to communication and so on.. this stuff was obvious early on. Irrespective of the equity bubble at that time, the potential was real. It was just too early.

There is nothing of this sort happening with LLMs. Where do they fit? Nobody has a clear answer and I don't see a clear one emerging any time soon. If someone has a very clear and direct answer, please feel free to reply :=)

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#36

Post by Atlas667 »

another_twist wrote: post #31
Atlas667 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looking back at 2025 we'll be saying "Remember when they said everyone would lose their jobs to AI..." Even if... one would think that a capitalist economy would do great with more and capable workers. One would think that more stuff would get done. Right? I think there is a good chance that it will, in fact, shift millions towards unemployment. I am pro technology, yet technology in the hands of profit seekers wil…

I dont know if we can draw parallels to something that happened hundred years ago. Since then there has been increases automation yet the unemployment rate esp in the US hasnt budged beyond 4% barring the depression years. I think access to education and opportunities to upskill are crucial for maintaining a sustainable economy. Its helps people just move on esp if they are of working age. With the industrial revolut…

I think there are a bunch of assumptions in your take.

There are billions of us. We cannot all be capitalists and start our own businesses. Literally 100 years ago American socialists like Olive Johnson were already pointing out how the profit motive from large players has ruined mom and pop shops and made medium businesses almost completely beholden to production and finance monopolies.

What do you think will happen with the increased production from AI? Will the capitalist just allow the masses to compete openly with them?

I doubt it. Most likely more monopolization will occur.

Small business owners are the tip (retail) of the massive whole-sale industrial-production monopolies or they are artisans at best. And the masses are the rest of us, the 95%.

Western suburban mentality always posits that these ills cannot happen, even though they were continuously happening even through out the 20th century (Detroit is just one example).

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#37

Post by RainyDayTmrw »

another_twist wrote: post #31
Atlas667 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looking back at 2025 we'll be saying "Remember when they said everyone would lose their jobs to AI..." Even if... one would think that a capitalist economy would do great with more and capable workers. One would think that more stuff would get done. Right? I think there is a good chance that it will, in fact, shift millions towards unemployment. I am pro technology, yet technology in the hands of profit seekers wil…

I dont know if we can draw parallels to something that happened hundred years ago. Since then there has been increases automation yet the unemployment rate esp in the US hasnt budged beyond 4% barring the depression years. I think access to education and opportunities to upskill are crucial for maintaining a sustainable economy. Its helps people just move on esp if they are of working age. With the industrial revolut…

The unemployment rate statistic is a bit misleading, because people who drop out of work permanently don't factor into it.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#38

Post by snowwrestler »

The bubble is AGI, which was pitched as imminent (it’s even part of the OpenAI-Microsoft agreement language). It will pop when people realize it’s not remotely near.

“AI will change how business is done” is not a bubble because every innovation changes how business is done, it’s just a matter of degree. Various forms of AI have been changing businesses for a decade at least.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#39

Post by lukev »

This is just "no true scotsman" for AI.

Because something could very easily pop soon, but this article is just laying the groundwork for an argument that "it wasn't AI popping, that was the belief you could run a AI adoption program and fire half your staff popping."

At some point, what's the difference? Obviously LLMs are here to stay in some form or another.

What the stock market does with that is an entirely different animal and honestly I'm not optimistic.

Re: The AI bubble argument misunderstands both bubbles and AI

#40

Post by d0ublespeak »

This article feels self defeating. It’s rewriting the meaning of the word bubble itself. There is a speculative asset bubble. Whilst I think there is some correctness in saying that drawing parallels with the Dotcom boom/bust is intellectually lazy I still think this acts as a notable precedent. Is there potential for AI usefulness long term? Yes, will it take exactly the same form as now or do the products and services exist now? No. So there is some utility in comparing the two. Either way this article reads like a bit of cope.
Post reply on HN