Live data from Hacker News

AI Is Too Big to Fail

sibylline.dev

51–60 of 140 posts

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#51
post #8

> Think of it like WWII, only only instead of planting victory gardens to beat the Nazis, we're building AI apps and finding ways to create the economic value needed to cover the reckless bets being made by the elites. LOL fuck this, the stock market deserves to burn to the ground.

When did the HackerNews comment section turn into this? Low quality, aggressive, fervently anti-establishment.

I agree. HN basically became Reddit.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#52

>~75–80% of S&P 500 gains Dot com bust was 50% of S&P / 80% on Nasdaq... we survived it.. For Nvidia: all it will take is for one smart grad student to find a better training algorithm to destroy 75% of their value. Why I think a better algorithm is out there: Total installed GPU Tflops = 4 billion. Tflops of human brain = 1 million

the 1 million is debatable, but you can't argue with the power consumption of 20W.

that said, if all the current infrastructure could run brain-equivalent models at 20W each, I'd wager we would have much more demand than currently.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#53
I think this is mostly about the US, right? Most countries haven't invested all that much in AI. Even if all this new AI would completely vanish overnight, I'm pretty sure most of the world wouldn't care one bit. Of course many AI companies and investors would be bankrupt; they'd be the real losers here. Many other companies and organisations would have wasted a lot of money on nothing, but they'll write it off and move on. If it bankrupts Microsoft, that would have a tremendous impact on many companies using Microsoft products of course (maybe MS should hurry up with that EU-US cloud split, so the EU branch would survive the crash).

But on the whole, I'm not too worried.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#54

I still have the hope that the AI bubble will leave as a side effect a massive build-out of energy infrastructure: Nuclear, Solar and Natural Gas. In my book, prosperity and progress is measured in Terajoules. If you have free, clean and abundant energy, you have industry, jobs, every fucking thing a healthy economy should want or need to have. And on the other side, I think the Chinese are deluding themselves on rob…

Imagine robots doing chemistry or biology experiments 24x7. There is so much potential. We don't need grad students to waste their precious time.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pensioners and retirees willingly dumping money into index funds without oversight are the dumb money that enables all of this. So yes, they deserve a haircut.

Pensioners don’t have a choice where their stuff goes. A teacher or something simply doesn’t deserve that kind of hardship.

Pension funds should be diversified and have a mix of asset classes that includes more than the stock market. Ideally, most of these assets will move independently so if one is doing particularly badly the others can balance it out to reduce overall volatility. If your pension fund is too heavily weighted to the market, that's a management problem with your fund.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#56
post #8

> Think of it like WWII, only only instead of planting victory gardens to beat the Nazis, we're building AI apps and finding ways to create the economic value needed to cover the reckless bets being made by the elites. LOL fuck this, the stock market deserves to burn to the ground.

When did the HackerNews comment section turn into this? Low quality, aggressive, fervently anti-establishment.

won't somebody think of the establishment

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#57
post #39

> AI is Too Big to Fail Now invest in my Ai company, 100mil at 10bn valuation, can't fail, too big.

You can't invest in me currently (except by retaining me as a consultant/architect), and if I was in a position to be invested in, the article would have had a different structure. My position is integrity first, you can stalk my LinkedIn to see that if you need proof -- I've never worked in adtech or other predatory industries, most of my work has been in the interest of public good and the protection of democracy.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#58
I think a lot of HNers are too close to the topic for the right perspective.

LLMs are as much of a feature of an existing technology as computers are features of electricity. ML and neural networks have been around for a long time and the transition to LLM usage for us feels like "yup, another feature, just a really good auto-complete".

For most users of LLMs, this is a magical feature that answers any questions and saves so much time and effort. I would even dare say that LLMs are a bigger leap in technology than the internet itself was. The internet connected people, "AI" made it so that we need less of each other!

What was the cause of the enlightenment and renaissance period in europe that led to a boom in science, technology and the industrial revolution which is responsible for computers to begin with? It was the discovery of the new world and the expansion of europe into asia and africa. Get gold and pearls from the new world and sell use it to buy things in the near and far east. This meant people can spend time studying science, but it also meant military R&D. Better ships, better guns,better cannons. You need better science for that. Not just for colonization but the competition between european powers.

What's my point? AI/LLMs, are a leap in that people can now do a lot less things they don't want to do. Even if it means social instability. There is a very active arms-race in military capability, disinformation, control of markets and influence of governments going on as we speak. and this in turn is going to result in better and better improvements in every sector.

The internet meant we had to learn new things, move to more efficient work. LLMs meant without learning as much we tell the computer to do things and all it needs is guidance and some correction.

We all see the fads and the hype all over. But there are very real and very dramatic advantages and values to be extracted from LLMs, which in the long run would be the equivalent of the industrial revolution.

The pessimism feels a lot like people were being pessimistic about the internet back in the 90s.

AI isn't just too big to fail, it isn't something that can fail. Can long distance communication "fail" , can electronic computing fail? can transportation on wheels fail?

All the grifters slapping AI on everything will fail, but the AI tech and all the value and change that comes with it, isn't something worth even consider as having a potential for failure.

(sorry for the long post)

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#59
post #53

I think this is mostly about the US, right? Most countries haven't invested all that much in AI. Even if all this new AI would completely vanish overnight, I'm pretty sure most of the world wouldn't care one bit. Of course many AI companies and investors would be bankrupt; they'd be the real losers here. Many other companies and organisations would have wasted a lot of money on nothing, but they'll write it off and m…

Well, last few times the US had a big recession, they took down the whole world with them. The biggest recession led almost directly to WWII, and that was before the US centralized that much power or money.

I don't live in the US, but I'm rather worried.

Re: AI Is Too Big to Fail

#60

>~75–80% of S&P 500 gains Dot com bust was 50% of S&P / 80% on Nasdaq... we survived it.. For Nvidia: all it will take is for one smart grad student to find a better training algorithm to destroy 75% of their value. Why I think a better algorithm is out there: Total installed GPU Tflops = 4 billion. Tflops of human brain = 1 million

But the flip side is excess capacity will be used for other fields which are not getting a chance.

On the other hand, GPUs die down fairly quickly, so this excess capacity had better prove useful rather quickly.
Post reply on HN