Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy’s obsession here. The value is absolutely inflated but it’s definitely real value and LLMs are not going to disappear unless we create a better AI technology.
In general we’re way past the point of tech bubbles popping. Software markets move incredibly fast and are incredibly resilient to this. There literally hasn’t been a software bubble popping since dotcom boom. Prove me wrong.
Even if you see problems with LLMs and AI in general this hopeful doomerism is really not helping anyone. Now instead of spending effort on improving things people are these angry, passive, delusional accelerationists without any self awareness.
LLMs can absolutely disappear as a mass market technology. They will always exist in some sense as long as there are computers to run them and people who care to try, but the way our economy has incorporated them is completely unsustainable. No business model has emerged that can support them, and at this point, I’m willing to say that there is no such business model without orders of magnitude gains in efficiency that may not ever happen with LLMs.
I get the thinking here, but past bubbles (dot com, housing) were also based on things that have real value, and the bubble still popped. A bubble, definitionally, is when something is priced far above its value, and the “pop” is when prices quickly fall. It’s the fall that hurts; the asset/technology doesn’t lose its underlying value.
I mean we haven’t figured out how to make AI profitable yet, and though it’s a cool technology with real world use cases, nobody has proven yet that the juice is worth the squeeze. There’s an unimaginable amount of money tied up in a technology on the hope that one day they find a way to make it profitable and though AI as a technology “improves”, its journey towards providing more value than it costs to run is not.
If I roleplayed as somebody who desperately wanted AI to succeed, my first question would be “What is the plan to have AI make money?” And so far nobody, not even the technology’s biggest sycophants have an answer.
AI as a technology is so far not profitable for anybody. The hardware AI runs on is profitable, as might be some start ups that are heavily leveraging AI, but actually operating AI is so far not profitable, and because increasingly smaller improvements in AI use exponentially more power, there’s no real path that is visible to any of us today that suggests anyone’s yet found a path to profitability. Aside from some kind of miracle out of left field that no one today has even conceived, the long term outlook isn’t great.
If AI as a technology busts, so does the insane profits behind the hardware it runs on. And without that left field technological breakthrough, the only option to pursue to avoid AI going completely bust is to raise prices astronomically, which would bust any companies currently dependent on all the AI currently being provided to them for basically next to nothing.
The entire industry is operating at a loss, but is being propped up by the currently abstract idea that AI will some day make money. This isn’t the “AI Hater” viewpoint, it’s just the spot AI is currently in. If you think AI is here to stay, you’re placing a bet on a promise that nobody as of today can actually make.
In a capitalist society, what is good or best is irrelevant. All that matters is if it makes money. AI makes no money. The $200 and $300/month plans put in rate limits because at those prices they’re losing too much money. Lets say the beak-even cost for a single request is somewhere between $1-$5 depending on the request just for the electricity, and people can barely afford food, housing, and transportation as it is. What is the business model for these LLMs going to be? A person could get a coffee today, or send a single request to an LLM? Now start thinking that they’ll need newer gpus next year. And the year after that. And after that. And the data center will need maintenance. They’re paying literally millions of dollars to individual programmers.
Maybe there is a niche market for mega corporations like Google who can afford to spend thousands of dollars a day on LLMs, but most companies won’t be able to afford these tools. Then there is the problem where if the company can afford these tools, do they even need them?
The only business model that makes sense to me is the one like BMW uses for their car seat warmers. BMW requires you to pay a monthly subscription to use the seat warmers in their cars. LLM makers could charge a monthly subscription to run a micro model on your own device. That free assistant in your Google phone would then be pay walled. That way businesses don’t need to carry the cost of the electricity, but the LLM is going to be fairly low functioning compared to what we get for free today. But the business model could work. As long as people don’t install a free version.
I don’t buy the idea that “LLMs are good so they are going to be a success”. Not as long as investors want to make money on their investments.
62% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. Perhaps saying most Americans are struggling is doomerism, but what percentage living paycheck to paycheck no longer counts as doomerism and is just a harsh truth? 75%? 90%? Do you think the number of people living paycheck to paycheck is increasing or decreasing this year?
Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy’s obsession here. The value is absolutely inflated but it’s definitely real value and LLMs are not going to disappear unless we create a better AI technology.
In general we’re way past the point of tech bubbles popping. Software markets move incredibly fast and are incredibly resilient to this. There literally hasn’t been a software bubble popping since dotcom boom. Prove me wrong.
Even if you see problems with LLMs and AI in general this hopeful doomerism is really not helping anyone. Now instead of spending effort on improving things people are these angry, passive, delusional accelerationists without any self awareness.
LLMs can absolutely disappear as a mass market technology. They will always exist in some sense as long as there are computers to run them and people who care to try, but the way our economy has incorporated them is completely unsustainable. No business model has emerged that can support them, and at this point, I’m willing to say that there is no such business model without orders of magnitude gains in efficiency that may not ever happen with LLMs.
I get the thinking here, but past bubbles (dot com, housing) were also based on things that have real value, and the bubble still popped. A bubble, definitionally, is when something is priced far above its value, and the “pop” is when prices quickly fall. It’s the fall that hurts; the asset/technology doesn’t lose its underlying value.
I mean we haven’t figured out how to make AI profitable yet, and though it’s a cool technology with real world use cases, nobody has proven yet that the juice is worth the squeeze. There’s an unimaginable amount of money tied up in a technology on the hope that one day they find a way to make it profitable and though AI as a technology “improves”, its journey towards providing more value than it costs to run is not.
If I roleplayed as somebody who desperately wanted AI to succeed, my first question would be “What is the plan to have AI make money?” And so far nobody, not even the technology’s biggest sycophants have an answer.
The profit of ai lies in this: mass surveillance and ads. Thats it.
The revenue of AI lies in mass surveillance and ads. But even going full dystopia, that has not been enough to make AI companies profitable.
AI is absolutely profitable just not for everybody.
AI as a technology is so far not profitable for anybody. The hardware AI runs on is profitable, as might be some start ups that are heavily leveraging AI, but actually operating AI is so far not profitable, and because increasingly smaller improvements in AI use exponentially more power, there’s no real path that is visible to any of us today that suggests anyone’s yet found a path to profitability. Aside from some kind of miracle out of left field that no one today has even conceived, the long term outlook isn’t great.
If AI as a technology busts, so does the insane profits behind the hardware it runs on. And without that left field technological breakthrough, the only option to pursue to avoid AI going completely bust is to raise prices astronomically, which would bust any companies currently dependent on all the AI currently being provided to them for basically next to nothing.
The entire industry is operating at a loss, but is being propped up by the currently abstract idea that AI will some day make money. This isn’t the “AI Hater” viewpoint, it’s just the spot AI is currently in. If you think AI is here to stay, you’re placing a bet on a promise that nobody as of today can actually make.
Who is it profitable for right now? The only ones I see are the ones selling shovels in a gold rush, like Nvidia.
In a capitalist society, what is good or best is irrelevant. All that matters is if it makes money. AI makes no money. The $200 and $300/month plans put in rate limits because at those prices they’re losing too much money. Lets say the beak-even cost for a single request is somewhere between $1-$5 depending on the request just for the electricity, and people can barely afford food, housing, and transportation as it is. What is the business model for these LLMs going to be? A person could get a coffee today, or send a single request to an LLM? Now start thinking that they’ll need newer gpus next year. And the year after that. And after that. And the data center will need maintenance. They’re paying literally millions of dollars to individual programmers.
Maybe there is a niche market for mega corporations like Google who can afford to spend thousands of dollars a day on LLMs, but most companies won’t be able to afford these tools. Then there is the problem where if the company can afford these tools, do they even need them?
The only business model that makes sense to me is the one like BMW uses for their car seat warmers. BMW requires you to pay a monthly subscription to use the seat warmers in their cars. LLM makers could charge a monthly subscription to run a micro model on your own device. That free assistant in your Google phone would then be pay walled. That way businesses don’t need to carry the cost of the electricity, but the LLM is going to be fairly low functioning compared to what we get for free today. But the business model could work. As long as people don’t install a free version.
I don’t buy the idea that “LLMs are good so they are going to be a success”. Not as long as investors want to make money on their investments.
Citation needed. The doomerism in this thread is so cringe.
62% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. Perhaps saying most Americans are struggling is doomerism, but what percentage living paycheck to paycheck no longer counts as doomerism and is just a harsh truth? 75%? 90%? Do you think the number of people living paycheck to paycheck is increasing or decreasing this year?
https://econofact.org/factbrief/is-there-a-consensus-that-a-majority-of-americans-are-living-paycheck-to-paycheck#%3A~%3Atext=While+one+survey+by+LendingClub%2Cspending%3B+62%25+answered+yes.