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

861–870 of 936 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#861

Post by SR2Z »

RugnirViking wrote: post #793
mlsu wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The allocation of capital is not even close to a monopoly. There are plenty of VC firms looking to fund almost any idea.

The point of VC, specifically, is to grow software monopolies - but it's very easy to pick up VC funding if you happen to live in the Bay Area.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#862

Post by Gravey »

ath3nd wrote: post #745
toephu2 wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media always says AI is the biggest technological change of our lifetime.. I think it was the internet actually.

The media was saying nfts are a reasonable investment and web3 is the future, so I am not sure if they have any remaining credibility. We are at the awesome moment in history when the AI bubble is popping so I am looking forward to a lot of journalists eating their words (not that anybody is keeping track but they are wrong most of the time) and a lot of LLM companies going under and the domino crash of the stocks of…

Can I ask why you would be looking forward to the stock market crashing? Vindication?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#863

Post by keernan »

Gravey wrote: post #862
ath3nd wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media was saying nfts are a reasonable investment and web3 is the future, so I am not sure if they have any remaining credibility. We are at the awesome moment in history when the AI bubble is popping so I am looking forward to a lot of journalists eating their words (not that anybody is keeping track but they are wrong most of the time) and a lot of LLM companies going under and the domino crash of the stocks of…

Can I ask why you would be looking forward to the stock market crashing? Vindication?

Who benefits from high stock prices?

Certainly not people regularly buying stocks or stock ETFs/Funds.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#864

Post by bryanlarsen »

nebula8804 wrote: post #808
mschuster91 wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of Elon not taking a no for an answer. He did it twice, with a massive success. A true shame to see how he's completely lost track with Tesla, the competition particularly from China is eating them alive. And in space, it's a matter of years until the rest of the world catches up. And now, he's ran out of tricks - and more importantly, on public support. He can't pivot any more, his entire brand is too tox…

I dont know, you could argue that maybe GM with the EV1 was the 'too early' EV and Tesla was just at the right moment. Same goes for SpaceX, The idea of a reusable launcher was not a new idea and studied by NASA. I think they did some test vehicles.

SpaceX is an excellent example of this phenomenon. Reusable rockets were "known" to be financially infeasible because the Space Shuttle was so expensive. NASA & oldspace didn't seriously pursue reusable vehicles because the mostly reusable Space Shuttle cost so much more than conventional disposable vehicles.

Similar to how Sears didn't put their catalog online in the 90's because putting it online on Prodigy failed so badly in the 80's.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#865

Post by bryanlarsen »

lotsoweiners wrote: post #733
dehrmann wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren't wrong. Its core business in what is still a viable-enough sector collapsed. Or if it were truly well-managed, running an ISP and a retailer should have been enough insight to be Amazon.

I worked at Sears at the time when Amazon first started becoming a household name. I for the life of me couldn’t understand why they didn’t make a copycat site called the Sears Catalog Online. But then I think about it and management wanted salesmanship because selling maintenance agreements was their cash cow. Low margin sales won in the long term hence we have Walmart and Amazon as the biggest retailers.

Likely standard management failure. Sears got burned badly when it put its catalog online on Prodigy in the 80's, so obviously online sales were doomed to failure.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#866

Post by Tallain »

todd-davies wrote: post #843
RugnirViking wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Many of us in the antitrust/competition law community are trying. One issue, specific to digital markets, is that the field has very few people who are both legally and technically literate. If you're a technical person looking for a career shift, moving into legal policy/academia has the potential to be quite high impact for that reason.

Outside of going back to school for another degree, how would this shift be possible?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#867

Post by deegles »

randomNumber7 wrote: post #806
miki123211 wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you wouldn't trust its medical advice without review from an actual doctor, why would you trust its advice on anything else? When an LLM gives you medical advice, it's right x% of the time. When a doctor gives you medical advice, it's right y% of the time. During the last few years, x has gone from 0 to wherever it is now, while y has mostly stayed constant. It is not unimaginable to me that x might (and notice…

If you consider how little time doctors have to look at you (at least in Germanys half broken public health sector) and how little they actually care ... I think x is already higher than y for me.

That's fair. Reliable access to a 70% expert is better than no access to a 99% expert.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#868

Post by Q6T46nT668w6i3m »

ghurtado wrote: post #358
Q6T46nT668w6i3m wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no evidence that it’ll scale like that. Progress in AI has always been a step function.

There's also no evidence that it won't, so your opinion carries exactly the same weight as theirs. > Progress in AI has always been a step function. There's decisively no evidence of that , since whatever measure you use to rate "progress in AI" is bound to be entirely subjective, especially with such a broad statement.

I don’t follow. We have benchmarks that have survived decades and illustrate the steps.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#869

Post by tenacious_tuna »

todd-davies wrote: post #843
RugnirViking wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Many of us in the antitrust/competition law community are trying. One issue, specific to digital markets, is that the field has very few people who are both legally and technically literate. If you're a technical person looking for a career shift, moving into legal policy/academia has the potential to be quite high impact for that reason.

Gods I would love to work more in a policy space, tho my background is entirely technical.

A friend of mine has been trying to get into law school for a few years; she's technically competent and plenty intelligent, but it's been hard going for her to get in, plus multiple years of education to even attempt the bar. All of that sounds like far too much sunk-cost to me to dally in and figure out if it's a path I would truly enjoy.

What ways could I engage with policy coming from a technical background that would serve as a useful stepping stone to a more policy based career, but doesn't require such an upfront cost as a law degree?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#870

Post by Gravey »

keernan wrote: post #863
Gravey wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I ask why you would be looking forward to the stock market crashing? Vindication?

Who benefits from high stock prices? Certainly not people regularly buying stocks or stock ETFs/Funds.

I suppose if you’re operating on the assumption that tech stocks are vastly overinflated then this makes sense. Otherwise I would expect the people that are regularly buying these securities would be happy that they’re increasing in value, no?
Post reply on HN