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

Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 936 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#791

Post by fluoridation »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #610
fluoridation wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I haven't heard anything about biological systems doing something comparable to backpropogation The brain isn't organized into layers like ANNs are. It's a general graph of neurons and cycles are probably common.

Actually that's not true. Our neocortex - the "crumpled up" outer layer of our brain, which is basically responsible for cognition/intelligence, has a highly regular architecture. If you uncrumpled it, it'd be a thin sheet of neurons about the size of a teatowel, consisting of 6 layers of different types of neurons with a specific inter-layer and intra-layer pattern of connections. It's not a general graph at all, bu…

None of what you've said contradicts it's a general graph instead of, say, a DAG. It doesn't rule out cyles either within a single layer or across multiple layers. And even if it did, the brain is not just the neocortex, and the neocortex isn't isolated from the rest of the topology.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#792

Post by RugnirViking »

elphinstone wrote: post #779
danpalmer wrote: post #706

Zuckerberg either doesn't have the resolve for changing the business, or just keeps picking the wrong directions (depending on your biases). First Facebook tried to pivot into mobile, pushed really hard for a short time and then flopped. Then Facebook tried really hard to make the Metaverse a thing, and for a while, but eventually Meta stopped finding it interesting and significantly reduced investment. Then AI was t…

>Then Facebook tried really hard to make the Metaverse a thing, and for a while, but eventually Meta stopped finding it interesting and significantly reduced investment. That's a charitable description of a massive bonfire of cash and credibility for an end product that looks worse than a 1990s MMORPG and has fewer active users than a small town sports arena.

Compared to other recent bubbles (crypto, nfts, and ai), its practically quaint and lovable by comparison. About the only person it hurt is mark Zuckerberg and the marketing grifters that tried to start companies around it.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#793

Post by RugnirViking »

mlsu wrote: post #719
seu wrote: post #422

These changes in direction (spending billions, freezing hiring) over just a few months show that these people are as clueless as to what's going to happen with AI, as everyone else. They just have the billions and therefore dictate where money goes, but that's it.

This is a structural problem with our economy, much larger than just Facebook. Due its large scale concentration, the allocation of capital in the economy as a whole has become far less efficient over the last 20 years.

But always remember, it's not technically a monopoly!

Boy am I tired of that one. We desperately need more smaller companies and actual competition but nobody seems to even be trying

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#794

Post by makeitdouble »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #781
platevoltage wrote: post #743

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re right, they don’t need AI. I finally stopped using Google search after they added the AI summary and didn’t add a way to turn it off. I’m just as bothered by Apple’s lack of AI as a am their lack of a touch screen on MacBooks. I use AI when I need AI.

Hm, so what'd you want from apple and google. One went too far in one direction and the other went too fair in the opposite direction. And it seems that you want to be somewhere in the middle?

I think in general we want granularity and choice.

So not just in how much AI there is, but what AI, where it's applied and where we can turn it off, and what context it has access to and where it's off bound.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#795

Post by jstgunderscore »

esaym wrote: post #552
tombert wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today I learned that Sears founded Prodigy! Amazing how far that company has fallen; they were sort of a force to be reckoned with in the 70's and 80's with Craftsman and Allstate and Discover and Kenmore and a bunch of other things, and now they're basically dead as far as I can tell.

There were quite a few small ISP's in the 1990's. Even Bill Gothard[0] had one. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/19990208003742/http://characterl...

[dead]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#796

Post by ath3nd »

aspenmayer wrote: post #789
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were a lot of things too big to fail Lehman brothers, Enron. When this bubble pops, its going to be absolute chaos maybe just like last time

It will be chaos for those working at Meta and those invested in them too much without an appropriate hedge. I doubt I will notice much, to be honest. Even if Meta tanked, unless Messenger/Whatsapp stop working, it’s kind of beside the point how much their stock trades for. Everyone will just use whatever has or keeps the most public interest, whether that is Meta-owned or something else. The worrying aspect is that…

> Meta serves the purposes of the IC status quo

The problem is that their products are getting worse and worse. Signal is already taking a huge share from WhatsApp (ads and AI chat bots, really?) and Messenger.

TikTok absolutely obliterated Instagram. Facebook is sliding into irrelevancy, and most importantly, they have a lot of failed products like Oculus, Metaverse (wtf is it anyway), LLAMa, etc. Now they are sliding into even more irrelevance and burning money even faster trying to poach extremely expensive OpenAI folks. My conspiracy theory is that Facebook ads earning numbers are somehow a scam.

After so many bad decisions on their part, so much waste and bad execution that I can't see them surviving the next 5 years.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#797

Post by aspenmayer »

ath3nd wrote: post #796
aspenmayer wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be chaos for those working at Meta and those invested in them too much without an appropriate hedge. I doubt I will notice much, to be honest. Even if Meta tanked, unless Messenger/Whatsapp stop working, it’s kind of beside the point how much their stock trades for. Everyone will just use whatever has or keeps the most public interest, whether that is Meta-owned or something else. The worrying aspect is that…

> Meta serves the purposes of the IC status quo The problem is that their products are getting worse and worse. Signal is already taking a huge share from WhatsApp (ads and AI chat bots, really?) and Messenger. TikTok absolutely obliterated Instagram. Facebook is sliding into irrelevancy, and most importantly, they have a lot of failed products like Oculus, Metaverse (wtf is it anyway), LLAMa, etc. Now they are slidi…

They can just buy other companies for 5 years and coast, or they would have done if not for antitrust concerns under Biden. They can afford to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to rockstars for well over 5 years, and acquihire their way to acquiring the next big thing. I think they’re probably appropriately valued alongside other trillion dollar companies, but they will likely find that it’s less lonely at the top than anticipated.

Signal serves IC interests too by requiring phone numbers.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#798

Post by PUSH_AX »

mattnewton wrote: post #478
aaronblohowiak wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are either limited by compute, available training data, or algorithms. You seem to believe we are limited by compute. I've seen other people argue that we are limited by training data. It is my totally inexpert belief that we are substantially limited by algorithms at this point.

I think algorithms is a unique limit because it changes how much data or compute you need. For instance, we probably have the algorithms we need to brute force solving more problems today, but they require infeasible compute or data. We can almost certainly train a new 10T parameter mixture of experts that continues to make progress in benchmarks, but it will cost so much to train and be completely undeployable with…

General intelligence exists in this world, the inability to transfer it to a machine does seem like an algorithm problem. When it’s here we don’t even know if it will be an llm, no one knows the computer requirements.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#799

Post by ringeryless »

ehnto wrote: post #713
throw310822 wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"technology too expensive to be offered at a profit (yet)" != hype

The MIT report that has everyone talking was about 95% of companies not seeing return on investment in using AI, and that is with the VC subsidised pricing. If it gets more expensive that math only gets worse. I can't predict the future, but one possibility is that AI will not be a general purpose replacement for human effort like some hope, but rather a more expensive than expected tool for a subset of use cases. I…

writing spam emails, that's what LLMs enduring market niche will end up being.

without structural comprehension, babbling flows of verbiage are of little use in automation.

CAD is basically the opposite of such approaches, as structural specifications extend through manufacturing phases out to QA.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#800

Post by RugnirViking »

foobarian wrote: post #550
me551ah wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe not. Scaling AI will require an exponential increase in compute and processing power, and even the current LLM models take up a lot of resources. We are already at the limit of how small we can scale chips and Moore’s law is already dead. So newer chips will not be exponentially better but will be more of incremental improvements, so unless the price of electricity comes down exponentially we might never see…

> Scaling AI will require an exponential increase in compute and processing power, I think there is something more happening with AI scaling; I think the scaling factor per user is a lot higher and a lot more expensive. Compare to the big initial internet companies. You added one server you could handle thousands more users; incremental cost was very low, not to mention the revenue captured through whatever adtech me…

I dont fully even get why; inference costs are way lower than training costs no?
Post reply on HN