31–40 of 130 posts
I do enjoy a good Ed Zitron sneer. The fact that the original article moved markets says a lot about the critical thinking skills of stock market traders.
It doesn't have any material effect on this article, but it says something about his ethics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cost, debt, difficulty forming a moat, gap between what the product promises and what it can do, and the difficulty actually raising capital required. His style is acerbic and (imo) excessive sometimes. But he's also one of a minority of journos actually looking at the numbers and adding them up. Which seems to be a rarity
Disagree. He's cherry picking an extremely limited subset of numbers, based on a weak understanding of the industry and a lack of access to a lot of private data, and taking advantage of vulnerable people.
[0] https://lovable.dev/blog/how-a-startup-replaced-a-salesforce...
[1] https://seekingalpha.com/news/4144652-klarna-shuts-down-sale...
The unit cost is going down and has gone down by more than 20-30x over the years. Sure, the fixed cost of training is going up but that's because of the implied returns. Once the returns to training don't happen, it would simply reduce modulo cutoff date updates. The companies have a choice to just stop training and focus on inference cost reduction.
What am I missing here? Unless the consumers decide that they are no longer willing to pay the same amount as before and their expectations are rising with prices falling, what else?
I've started to feel like Ed Zitron is actively hurting people I care about. I'm lucky to have worked in the field for a long time, and be able to spend a lot of tokens. In the last month it's become clear to me that the tech works. The science is done, and what's left is engineering. There are a lot of risks and mitigations and theory to build, but it's all solvable. The tech isn't mature, but neither was the Intern…
I've started to feel like Ed Zitron is actively hurting people I care about. I'm lucky to have worked in the field for a long time, and be able to spend a lot of tokens. In the last month it's become clear to me that the tech works. The science is done, and what's left is engineering. There are a lot of risks and mitigations and theory to build, but it's all solvable. The tech isn't mature, but neither was the Intern…
Offtopic - The success of coding agents must be Ed Zitron's nightmare. He has been a perpetual bear
Offtopic - The success of coding agents must be Ed Zitron's nightmare. He has been a perpetual bear
I don't think so. His argument is not "this tech doesn't work", but rather "these businesses aren't economically viable" And that the smoke and mirrors accounting and perpetual thirst for more billions indicates just how unviable it is Whilst he does dunk on LLM capabilities, the framing is the business angle - can Anysphere etc. actually form a moat and make a profit?
> You cannot "fix" hallucinations (the times when a model authoritatively tells you something that isn't true, or creates a picture of something that isn't right), because these models are predicting things based off of tags in a dataset, which it might be able to do well but can never do so flawlessly or reliably.
ChatGPT is fairly reliable.
>Deep Research has the same problem as every other generative AI product. These models don't know anything, and thus everything they do — even "reading" and "browsing" the web — is limited by their training data and probabilistic models that can say "this is an article about a subject" and posit their relevance, but not truly understand their contents. Deep Research repeatedly citing SEO-bait as a primary source proves that these models, even when grinding their gears as hard as humanely possible, are exceedingly mediocre, deeply untrustworthy, and ultimately useless.
This is untrue in spirit.
> You can fight with me on semantics, on claiming valuations are high and how many users ChatGPT has, but look at the products and tell me any of this is really the future.
Imagine if they’d done something else.
Imagine if they’d done anything else.
Imagine if they’d have decided to unite around something other than the idea that they needed to continue growing.
Imagine, because right now that’s the closest you’re going to fucking get.
This is what he said in 2024. He really thought ChatGPT is not in the future.
There are so many examples and its clear that he's not good faith and has consistently gotten the spirit wrong.
The financial market things are over my head and I don't have a dog in the game, but I think "Nobody is replacing salesforce with their internally vibe coded software" is just false? Both taken literally [0] [1] and as denying the general trend. Just in my company we already replaced WMS software subscription with own solution, and I wouldn't be able to write it fast enough and maintain it by myself without the use o…