491–500 of 531 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Helion has one under construction https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/helion-energy-starts... Whether it works or not is of course another matter.
Is it a fusion reactor if it can't maintain a fusion reaction and generator energy?
Also no one is talking about how exposed we are to Taiwan. Nvidia, AMD, Apple, any company building out GPUs (so Google, Microsoft, Meta etc), even Intel a bit, are all manufacturing everything with one company, and it's largely happening in Taiwan. If China invades Taiwan, why wouldn't TSMC, Nvidia and AMD stock prices go to zero?
I don't think they really need to invade for this. It is almost in artillery range (there are rounds that can go 150km). They also could just send a big rocket barrage onto the factories. I assume it would be very hard to defend from such a short distance. Then most ports and cities in taiwan are towards east (with big mountains on the western side). Would be very bad if China decides to blockade it by shooting ships…
Looking how west has little willpower to truly sanction russia, against China there will be even less sanctions.
The most frustrating thing to me about this most recent rash of biz guy doubting the future of AI articles is the required mention that AI, specifically an LLM based approach to AGI, is important even if the numbers don't make sense today. Why is that the case? There's plenty of people in the field who have made convincing arguments that it's a dead end and fundamentally we'll need to do something else to achieve AGI…
Where's the business value? Right now it doesn't really exist, adoption is low to nonexistent outside of programming and even in programming it's inconclusive as to how much better/worse it makes programmers. I have a friend who works at PwC doing M&A. This friend told me she can't work without ChatGPT anymore. PwC has an internal AI chat implementation. Where does this notion that LLMs have no value outside of progr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think I follow. 1 trillion total investment divided by 100k yields 10 million man years, or 300k man-careers. Just the disruption we can already see in the software industry are easily of that magnitude.
>Just the disruption we can already see in the software industry are easily of that magnitude. WTF ? Where are you seeing that ? Also no you can't calculate 100k over 30 years as 3M because you expect investment growth - lets say stock market average of 7 percent per year that investment must return like 24 million in 30 years otherwise its not worth it. That means 8 trillion in next 30 years if you look over that lo…
Sure, the financial math over 30 years does not follow elementary arithmetic, and if the development hits a wall tomorrow they will have trouble recovering the investment just from code automation tools.
But this is a clearly nonsense scenario, the tech is rapidly expanding to other fields that have obvious potential to automate. This is not a pie-in the sky future technology yet to be invented, it's obvious productization of latent capability, similar to the early internet days. There might be some overshoots but the latent potential is all there, the AI investments are looking to be the first movers in that enormously lucrative space and take, what seem to me, reasonable financial risks in light of the rewards.
My claim is not that AGI will soon be available, but that applying existing frontier models on the entire economy, in the form of mature, yet to be developed products, will easily generate disruption that has a present value in the trillions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Just the disruption we can already see in the software industry are easily of that magnitude. WTF ? Where are you seeing that ? Also no you can't calculate 100k over 30 years as 3M because you expect investment growth - lets say stock market average of 7 percent per year that investment must return like 24 million in 30 years otherwise its not worth it. That means 8 trillion in next 30 years if you look over that lo…
The global employment in software development and adjacent is in the tens of millions. To say the impact of AI code automation will be, at max, a rounding error of just 1-2% of that is just silly; currently, the junior pipeline is almost frozen in the global north, entire batches of graduates can't find jobs in tech. Sure, the financial math over 30 years does not follow elementary arithmetic, and if the development…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> using a programming language you have not used before But why would I do that? Either I'm learning a new language in which case I want to be as hands-on as possible and the goal is to learn, not to produce. Or I want to produce something new in which case, obviously, I'd use a toolset I'm experienced in.
There are plenty of scenarios where you want to work with a new language but you don't want to have to dedicate months/years of your life to becoming expert in it because you are only going to use it for a one-time project. For example, perhaps I want to use a particular library which is only available in language X. Or maybe I'm writing an add-on for a piece of software that I use frequently. I don't necessarily wan…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[even in programming it's inconclusive as to how much better/worse it makes programmers.] Try building something new in claude code (or codex etc) using a programming language you have not used before. Your opinion might change drastically. Current AI tools may not beat the best programmer, they definitely improves average programmer efficiency.
The question is: is that value worth the US$400bi per year of investment sucking out all the money from other ventures? It's a damn good tool, I use it, I've learned the pitfalls, it has value but the inflation of potential value is, by definition, a bubble...
If you told me that you would spend half a trillion and the best minds on reading the whole internet, then with some statistical innovation try to guess the probable output of an input. The way it works now seems about right, probably a bit disappointing even.
I would also say, it seems cool and you could do that, but why would you? At least when the training is done it is cheap to use right? No!? What the actual fuck!
I keep seeing articles like this but does anyone actually think we're not in a bubble? From what I've seen these companies acknowledge it's a bubble and that they're overspending without a way to make the money back. They're doing it because they have the money and feel it's worth the risk in case it pays off. If they don't spend, another company does, and it hits big they will be left behind. This is at least insura…
LLMs are legitimate AI for the first time, and have real use cases and have changed things across myriad industries. It's disrupting education in a big way. The google AI search thing is becoming useful. When I look at products on Amazon, I often ask it's AI review thing (Rufus?) questions and it gives me good answers, so good that I don't really validate anymore.
There's massive, intense competition, and know one can predict how it is going to go, so there probably will be things that are bubble-y that pop, sure, but it's not like AI has hit a permanent plateau and we are as far as the tech is going to go. It's just getting started, but it'll probably be a weird and bumpy path.
I feel kind of like a Luddite sometimes but I don't understand why EVERYONE is rushing to use AI? I use a couple different agents to help me code, and ChatGPT has largely replaced Google in my everyday use, but I genuinely don't understand the value proposition of every other companies offerings. I really feel like we're in the same "Get it out first, figure out what it is good for later" bubble we had like 7 years a…
How tech innovation happens is very different from how people think it happens. There are nice, simple stories told after the fact, but in the beginning and middle it is very messy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Autonomous cars did have a bubble moment. They were hyped and didn't deliver on the promises. We still don't have level 5 and consumer vehicles are up to level 3. It doesn't mean it's not a useful or cool technology. All great tech has gone through some kind of hype/bubble stage.
Bro waymo cars are level 4. I ride them on the regular. I don't use uber anymore.