Hard Pass

8 readers
0 users here now
Rules
  1. Don't be an asshole
  2. Don't make us write more rules.

View hardpass in other ways:

Hardpass.lol is an invite-only Lemmy Instance.
founded 1 year ago
ADMINS

hard pass chief

1
 
 
2
35
me irl (lemmy.today)
submitted 29 minutes ago by sanitation@lemmy.today to c/me_irl@lemmy.world
 
 
3
 
 
4
 
 
5
 
 
6
 
 

From his latest article:

One of my sources has come forward and brought me a story that will possibly burst the AI bubble. The reason they brought this to me is that I’ve shown — and will continue to show — that I actually give a shit about this industry and the people in it. If you’re wondering what the story is, know that it’s the information I’ve wanted for years, delivered as I have always wanted it, and I will treat it with the reverence it deserves. Imagine what the worst possible thing for me to get would be and you’re probably close.

Link: https://www.wheresyoured.at/ai-is-slowing-down/

I must say I'm pretty excited.

7
 
 
8
 
 
9
 
 
10
 
 
11
12
13
 
 
14
17
AI Is Slowing Down (www.wheresyoured.at)
submitted 58 minutes ago by alyaza@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
 
 

No matter how much you dress up whatever AI service has gaslit you into believing it’s sentient, generative AI is inherently limited, impossibly expensive and economically unviable. Its services cost too much to run, its progenitors have no path to profitability, and no amount of rigged benchmarks and anecdotal examples of theoretical engineering teams that are “10x’d” can make up for the fact that you can’t measure the cost of an LLM-driven task or its return on investment.

Anyone claiming that you have to “measure AI’s ROI differently” is attempting to con either you or themselves. While it’s tough to measure the ROI of a particular worker or project, most workers and projects don’t increase your operating expenses by anywhere from 10% to 100% under the vaguest of promises that you might be “doing the future.” AI is calamitously expensive and, despite years of promises of it getting cheaper for both those running AI services and its customers, costs have only ever increased.

I think that’s by design. AI labs want their costs to be high so that they can continue growing at ridiculous rates, all so that they can keep feeding money to their hyperscaler compute partners who then invest that money right back into them, creating further reasons to keep buying NVIDIA GPUs, so that NVIDIA can then invest that money back into either AI compute providers (who OpenAI and Anthropic pay) or the AI labs themselves.

Concepts like “efficiency” or “cost reduction” run counter to the greater narrative of AI’s voracious sprawl of data center capex and still-theoretical AI revenue. If OpenAI or Anthropic were to seek profitability or sustainability (assuming these things were possible), that would create less demand for AI compute, which would mean less demand for Azure or Google Cloud or Amazon Web Services or CoreWeave or Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, which would in turn mean less demand for NVIDIA GPUs.

The problem with this marvelous plan is that at some point there had to be an honest transaction — real, honest, sustainable demand based on a reliable product that people liked paying for because they understood its value. Right now, AI revenues are either chaotically experimental or so thoroughly-subsidized that labs are giving away hundreds of dollars a user in the hopes that at some point said user might want to pay even more money for measurably less value, the kind of proposition you make when you think your customers are fucking idiots.

15
 
 
16
17
 
 
18
19
20
21
 
 
22
 
 
23
24
25
 
 
view more: next ›