• 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s frankly ridiculous. Ai is useful but the only company that deserves to get this much gains on the stock market is possibly Nvidia, because they make actual sales of actual hardware.

      Everyone else puts out AI that is much worse than open gpt with tons of marketing to try and make up for it.

      There is aws summit now in a couple of days where I live and there was more AI breakout sessions than you can shake a stick at. It’s definently overhyped.

  • Ibaudia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Yes. Tech is a hype-based sector where the actual value of products is obfuscated by marketing. When the AI craze settles down, hopefully we’ll stop seeing it injected into everything.

  • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ai isn’t the bubble, that’ll keep on improving, although probably not at this rate.

    The hype bubble is companies adding AI to their product where it offers very little, if any, added value, which is incredibly tedious.

    The latter bubble can burst, and we’ll all be better for it. But generative AI isn’t going anywhere.

    • egeres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      This

      AI is actually providing value and advancing to a huge rate, I don’t know how people can dismiss that so easily

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        How has it helped you personally in every day life?

        And if it’s doing some of your job with prompts that anybody could write, should you be paid less, or should you be replaced by someone juggling several positions?

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Your question sounds like a trap but I found a bunch of uses for it.

          • Rewriting emails
          • Learning quickly how to get popular business software to do stuff
          • Wherever I used to use a search engine
          • Setup study sessions on a topic I knew very little about. I scan the text. Read it. Give it to the AI/LLM. Discuss the text. Have it quiz me. Then move to the next page.
          • Used it at a poorly documented art collection to track down pieces.
          • Basically everything I know about baking. If you are curious my posts document the last 7 months or so of my progress.
          • Built a software driver (a task I hate) almost completely by giving it the documentation
          • Set it up so it can make practice tests for my daughters school work
          • Explored a wide range of topics

          Now go ahead and point out that I could have done all this myself with just Google, the way we did back in the day. That’s the thing about this stuff. You can always make an argument that some new thing is bad by pointing out it is solving problems that were already solved or solving problems no one cares about. Whenever I get yelled at or hear people complain about opposite things I know that they just want to be angry and they have no argument. It’s just rage full throwing things at the wall to see what sticks.

          • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            You can always make an argument that some new thing is bad by pointing out it is solving problems that were already solved or solving problems no one cares about.

            That’s not the issue. I’m not a luddite. The issue is that you can’t rely on its answers. The accuracy varies wildly. If you trust it implicitly there’s no way of telling what you end up with. Human learning process normally involves comparing information to previous information, some process of vetting, during which your brain “muscles” are exercised so they become better at it all the time. It’s like being fed in bed and never getting out to do anything by yourself, and to top it off you don’t even know if you’re being fed correct information.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      We referred to the dotcom bubble as the dotcom bubble, but that didn’t mean that the web went away, it just meant that companies randomly tried stuff and had money thrown at them because the investors had no idea either.

      So same here, AI bubble because it’s being randomly attempted without particular vision with lots and lots of money, not because the technology fundamentally is a bust.

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s cool guys, I asked ChatGPT and it said:

    The term “AI bubble” suggests a speculative frenzy similar to previous bubbles in tech. While there’s certainly a lot of excitement and investment in AI, it’s unlikely to cause an economic crash on its own. However, if promises aren’t met and investments don’t yield expected returns, there could be adjustments in the market. AI’s impact is profound, but its realization takes time and nuanced understanding.

    So we just might see an “adjustment”, no way this is a bubble.

  • ozoned@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    The next big thing is moving all of your servers to the cloud!

    The next big thing is moving all of your software to containers!

    The next big thing is moving all of your money to crypto!

    The next big thing is moving everything to AI!

    Yes we’re in ANOTHER tech gold rush. Not saying these things don’t have their place, but the tech industry is infatuated with the next big thing and burning through money and the ones that get burnt are the average working folks. Ask me how I know, currently in year two of a hiring and pay freeze as AWS isn’t as cheap as predicted… Who could have fucking guessed? They mean besides everyone but the CTO that’s fucking who!

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is really the crazy part; tech is basically operating a stream of bubbles, endlessly collapsing one into the next in the search for infinite growth. It’s gotten to the point where the bubble collapse barely even seems to matter anymore unless you’re one of the suckers going down with it. The industry as a whole has basically embraced perpetual collapse as its fundamental structure.

    • realharo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      But the cloud thing and the container thing actually happened. Not 100%, but it is basically the standard these days.

      Of the things you mentioned, only crypto is mostly bullshit tech with no actual use.

      • ozoned@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Not all companies NEED cloud and containers. But execs push it anyway. That’s my point. As I said, they have actual use, but not EVERYONE NEEDS this shit. It’s just tech-bros telling us we need it and execs being too stupid to know otherwise.

        • Cringe2793@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          They don’t NEED it, sure. But it sure makes life a lot easier. It makes the software easier to maintain and scale.

      • bobalot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I remember 1998.

        It wasn’t as dumb as this shit.

        And these dorks should have learnt from the dot com and crypto-currency crashes.

  • Pohl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Nvidia is making a thing and selling it. No matter what happens with AI tech, they are going to keep their winnings.

    Everybody else… well they borrowed/raised and spent a FORTUNE on R&D, chips, and electricity to make a product that has no realized commercial value (yet?). They are either going to figure out where the money comes from soon or the bills gonna come due. The next 12 months are going to be popcorn worthy if you like watching the tech industry.

    • hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Nvidia is making tons of money now, but they’re still going to be in hot water with investors when they have to explain why exponential revenue growth cannot be sustained as revenues crash back down to the norm.

      • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        You wanna know the real issue with the world? This right here, society as a whole accepting and promoting a system of measuring a company’s worth that by definition will make it fail after getting as much reach as possible. Almost ensuring everything will always be shit

        Oh this quarter the company only got 74 billion in revenue instead of the projected 80? Sell everything it’s no longer profitable!!! Abandon ship!

        • hark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yep, it’s a system that relies on infinite growth and gets upset if there’s growth but it’s not fast enough or if there is any temporary setback no matter how minor or even if things level off for a bit. It’s ridiculous.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s a hype bubble. AI had been around for a while and will continue to be. The problem is specifically Large Language Models. They’ve been trained to SOUND human, but not to actually use that ability for anything more useful than small talk and bullshit. However because it SOUNDS charasmatic, and that is interesting to people, companies have started cramming it into everything they can think of to impress shareholders.

    Shareholders are a collective group of people who are, on average, really more psychologically similar to crows than other humans - they like shiny things, have a mob mentality, and can only use the most basic of tools available, in their case usually money. New things presented in a flashy way by a charasmatic individual are most attractive to them, and they will seldom do any research beyond superficial first impressions. Any research they actually do generally skews towards confirmation bias.

    This leads to an unfortunate feature of capitalism, which is the absolute need to make the numbers go up. To impress their shareholders, companies have to jangle keys in front of their faces. So whenever The Hip New Things comes along, it’s all buzzwords and bullshit as they try and find any feasible way to cram it into their product. If they could make Smart Corn 2.0 powered by Chat GPT they would, and sell it for three times as much in the same produce isle as normal corn. And then your corn would tell you this great recipe if knows where the sauce is made with a battery acid base.

    In most recent memory, this exact scenario played out with NFTs. When the NFT market collapsed as was inevitable, the corporations who swore it would supercharge their sales all quietly pretended it never happened. Soon something new was jangled in front of the shareholders and everybody forgot about them.

    Now that generative AI is proving itself to just be a really convincing bullshitter, it’s only a matter of time until it either dies and quietly slinks away or mutates into the next New Things and the cycle repeats. Like a pandemic of greed and stupidity. Maybe they’ll figure out how to teach Chat GPT how to check and cite verified sources and make it actually do what they currently claim it does.

    I guess it depends on if they can make it shiny enough to impress the crows.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think we’re in an ai bubble because Nvidia is way over valued and I agree with you that often people flock to shiny new things and many people are taking risk with the hope of making it big…and many will get left holding the bag.

      But how do you go from NFTs, which never had widespread market support, to the market pumping a trillion dollars into Nvidia alone? This makes no sense. And to down play this as “just a bullshitter” leads me to believe you have like zero real world experience with this. I use copilot for coding and it’s been a boost to productivity for me, and I’m a seasoned vet. Even the ai search results, which many times have left me scratching my head, have been a net benefit to me in time savings.

      And this is all still pretty new.

      While I think there it is over hyped and people are being ridiculous with how much this will change things, at the very least this is going to be a huge new tool, and I think you’re setting yourself up to be left behind if you aren’t embracing this and learning how to leverage it.

      • NoMoreCocaine@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The AI technology we’re using isn’t “new” the core idea is several decades old, only minor updates since then. We’re just using more parallel processing and bigger datasets to brute force the “advances”. So, no, it’s not actually that new.

        We need a big breakthrough in the technology for it to actually get anywhere. Without the breakthrough, we’re going to burst the bubble once the hype dies down.

        • Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          The landmark paper that ushered in the current boom in generative AI (Attention is all you need (Vaswani et al 2017)) is less than a decade old (and attention itself as a mechanism is from 2014), so I’m not sure where you are getting the idea that the core idea is “decades” old. Unless you are taking the core idea to mean neural networks, or digital computing?