I think what everyone underestimated was the absolute bonkers amount of compute it will take and how that compute must scale in order to keep up with larger and larger models.
Meta overbought compute and is considering selling it like SpaceX did.
Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
551–560 of 661 posts
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#552Earlier quoted context omitted.
He leads a Trillion dollar company that employs a lot of AI scientists and researchers.
I really wish people would stop using market cap as a standin for value. Investors are incredibly stupid. Meta has actual revenue to point at.
It's a concrete measure of available resources. More so than revenue.
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#553Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question, is there a single successful large investment made by Meta recently ? I just know about the abject failures :)
Meta Glasses might be the next big thing.
AR/VR is the next big thing since 2015, the cumulated revenues since then don't even match the yearly revenues they were predicting for 2020 alone. This is going to end up like 3d TVs
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#554Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is: I could produce 2-3 times as much code as before _without_ an LLM, if I didn't care about my colleagues' ability to review my output properly. Lines of code are a liability, not an asset. You want as few of them as you can get away with, without compromising the actual asset: the functionality. A huge part of the job of Software Engineering is producing the right amount of code at the right time.
> Lines of code are a liability, not an asset. You want as few of them as you can get away with, without compromising the actual asset: the functionality. > A huge part of the job of Software Engineering is producing the right amount of code at the right time. Absolutely true, however my experience says that the correlation between "good software engineering practices" and "positive business outcomes" is, at best, sm…
Lines of code are a business liability. They are future cost.
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#555Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#556Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't like Zuckerberg whatsoever, but there are plenty of reasons you could potentially care about his opinion: - He could be well-placed to see whether AI agent development is successful since at a high level he oversees much of it, and will be getting detailed metrics and things. - Whether or not his opinion is correct, tech CEOs are notorious trend-chasers, and his opinion could set the tone for other companies.…
Honest question, is there a single successful large investment made by Meta recently ? I just know about the abject failures :)
Rayban glasses with the HUD in your eyeglass will go mainstream when they get a 10 hr battery instead of the 1.5 hr battery of today.
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#557Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah they'll hit a ceiling. Can only get so big before things collapse. And besides, they've already churned through the Internet's data. Not much new content left in the wild and patterns in other data forms (audio, image, etc should be pretty low by comparison.
I agree we're at diminishing returns, but when brain scanning gets good enough you have a better dataset than the internet, Facebook is deep into that research.
Suddenly got dark up in here...
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#558Earlier quoted context omitted.
But if you take the same perspective as a VC: 95% of your bets can fail if the other 5% are spectacular. He made spectacular bets with Instagram and WhatsApp. Most CEOs don’t make spectacular bets because their business doesn’t allow it, meaning the VC analogy doesn’t hold for them.
Hasn’t Meta failed to monetise WhatsApp? So it may be popular but they have ultimately failed commercially so far. They just bought an Indian startup and immediately put the founder in charge of WhatsApp. Only this week they announced WhatsApp would allow usernames rather than rely on phone numbers. All the other competitors apps (signal,telegram etc) did this years ago.
Whatsapp is by far meta biggest potential. If they could turn it into a superApp like WeChat they would make a lot of money but only if that don't destroy the app.
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#559Earlier quoted context omitted.
This repros nearly 100% of the time on most LLMs, even the most advanced ones: https://share.gemini.google/u9NwYu7lbgxe
n=1 but I gave this to Sonnet 5 medium effort (free model) and it had no trouble with it
Try it without "reasoning". As you can see in my example (and GP), it meanders to correctness eventually after emphatically being wrong, and most reasoning modes hide that from you.
If LLMs worked the way people want to believe they do, there’d be no reason to start in the wrong place — a computer should have the facts!
Re: Zuckerberg says AI agent development going slower than expected
#560Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is: I could produce 2-3 times as much code as before _without_ an LLM, if I didn't care about my colleagues' ability to review my output properly. Lines of code are a liability, not an asset. You want as few of them as you can get away with, without compromising the actual asset: the functionality. A huge part of the job of Software Engineering is producing the right amount of code at the right time.
> Lines of code are a liability, not an asset. I have been saying this for years, I once had a heated argument about a small system of maybe 1000 lines of code that was technically superior and more scalable but was freaking 1000 lines of code to maintain compared to the quick and dirty 10 lines of code it was suppose to abstract and make generic (for future use of course). That with also countless debates over insig…
>Many developers are too focused on delivery value compared to maintenance cost.
The way this is worded feels like it leaves the blame on developers. Aren't these developers focused on exactly what they are being judged by? Shouldn't we say it is the management who is too focused on delivery value compared to maintenance cost? Is it the developer's job to guide management or the manager's job to request guidance, assuming such guidance is needed?
We need to make sure the responsibility to resolve this problem falls on those with the power to act on it, and in this, developers tend to be receiving far more responsibility to fix than power to fix.