The current breed of generative “AI” won’t ‘die out’. It’s here to stay. We are just in the early Wild-West days of it, where everyone’s rushing to grab a piece of the pie, but the shine is starting to wear off and the hype is juuuuust past its peak.

What you’ll see soon is the “enshittification” of services like ChatGPT as the financial reckoning comes, startup variants shut down by the truckload, and the big names put more and more features behind paywalls. We’ve gone past the “just make it work” phase, now we are moving into the “just make it sustainable/profitable” phase.

In a few generations of chips, the silicon will have made progress in catching up with the compute workload, and cost per task will drop. That’s the innovation to watch out for now, who will de-throne Nvidia and its H100?

Deleted comment

Well, and also navigating the minefields that the LLMs absolutely have copyrighted material in them that wasn't paid for or licensed. E.G. Dall-E can produce a full image of Fresh Cut Grass, a character owned by Critical Role.

And that the stuff they produce isn't copyright-able.

So much fucking this.

Every cash grab right now around AI is just a frontend for a chatGPT API. And every investor who throws money at them is the mark. And now they’re crying a river.

Never mind that LLMs are a far cry from AI.

IRL, people are doing some amazing things with generative AI, esp in 2D graphic art.

Woah, shiny bland images that are a regurgitation of stolen artwork!!!

It’s also helped me find the names of several books and films that have been rattling around in my mind, some for decades, which actually made me very happy because not remembering that sort of thing drives me a little mad.

I’m stuck on two books that it can’t work out - both absolute trash pulp fiction, one that I stopped reading because it was so terrible and the other that was so bad but I actually wouldn’t mind reading again.

Oh well, can’t have it all.

people are doing

No they ain’t doing shit, they just prompt

It also reminds me of crypto. Lots of people made money from it, but the reason why the technology persists has more to do with the perceived potential of it rather than its actual usefulness today.

There are a lot of challenges with AI (or, more accurately, LLMs) that may or may not be inherent to the technology. And if issues cannot be solved, we may end up with a flawed technology that, we are told, is just about to finally mature enough for mainstream use. Just like crypto.

To be fair, though, AI already has some very clear use cases, while crypto is still mostly looking for a problem to fix.

Or computers decades before that.

Many of these advances are incredibly recent.

And also many of the things we use in our day to day are ai powered without people even realising.

It is a risky investment. Taking care of your kid is something where we have done it enough that we understand the risks and pay off and most parents can make a reasonable prediction. (a few kids will "turn 21 in prison doing life without parole" - but most turn out okay and return love to their parents and attempt to improve society - though you may not agree with their definition of improve society)

I have no idea if the current faults with AI will be solved or not. That is a risk you are taking. It is useful for some things, but we don't know how useful.

Did you read the article? The problem hasn't been getting some people to pay for some things, it's that the things that are available so far are losing loads of money. Or at least, that's the premise.

I was going to say...I use AI-transcription tools for video editing, AI-upscaling, and Resolve dropped an incredible AI green screen tool that makes it effortless. I also use AI to repair audio as of 6mo ago lol. I don't think I gone more than 48hrs without using an AI tool professionally.

The problem here is that AI in the media has become synonymous with generalized LLMs, while other “AI” applications have been in place for many years doing more specific things that have more obvious use cases that can be more easily commercialised.

I think they mean that it’s costing companies a lot of money to operate but their returns aren’t high enough to justify the costs.

So far what I’ve seen from AI is that it lies and lies and lies. It lies about history. It lies about science. It lies about politics. It lies about case law. It lies about programming libraries. Maybe this will all be fixed some day, or maybe it will just get worse. Until then the only thing I would trust it is about something in which their is no wrong answer.

If you think businesses have sunk this much money and effort into AI and didn’t do a cost-benefit analysis that stretched out decades, you are being naive or disingenuous.

Are you kidding? We literally just watched the same bubble and burst in companies that rushed to get their piece of the Metaverse and NFT cash grab. I worked at a SaaS company that decided to add AI features because it was in the news and Azure offered it as a service. There was zero financial analysis done, just like for every other feature they added

I’m sure Microsoft has a plan since they invested heavily. But even Google is playing catch-up like they did with GCP.

Do people really not understand that we are in the early stages of ai development?

Yes. Top post in this thread is someone cheering that AI won’t replace people in hollywood.

Just give it time. Remember how poor voice recognition and translation software was at first?

pretty much all improvements aren’t “better tech”, but just “bigger tech”. Reducing their footprint is an unsolved problem (just like it has always been with neural networks, for decades)

In my case, I still want to know if it’s not making rich people richer, because a) fuck rich people, and b) I don’t want to buy into things that will disappear in a year when the hype dies down. As a “consumer” my purchasing decisions impact my life, and the actions of the wealthy affect that more than you’d like.

A powerful tool maybe, but useless

If your drill needs a nuclear plant and monthly subcription to drill a hole, it’s a shitty tool

Hm. I think you should zoom out a bit and try to recognize that AI isn’t stagnant.

Voice recognition and translation programs to years before they were appropriate for real-world applications. AI is also going to require years before it’s ready. But that time is coming. We haven’t reached a ‘ceiling’ for AI’s capabilities.

There was a smallish VFX group here that was attached to a volume screen company. They employed something like 20 people I think? So pretty small.

But the volume screen employed a guy who could do an adequate enough job with generative tools instead and the company folded. The larger VFX company they partner with had 200 employees, they recently cut to 50.

In my field, a team leader in 2018 could earn about 180,000 AUD P/A. Now those jobs are advertised for 130,000 AUD, because new models can do ~80% of the analysis with human accuracy.

AI is already folding companies and cutting jobs. It’s not in the news maybe, but as industries shift to compete with smaller firms leveraging AI it will cascade.

I had/have my own company, we were attached to Metropolis which unfortunately folded. I think that had a role to play in the job cuts as well. Luckily for me I wasn’t overleveraged, but I am packing up and changing careers for sure.

Oh surprise surprise, looks like generative AI isn’t going to fulfill Silicon Valley and Hollywood studios’ dream of replacing artist, writers, and programmers with computer to maximize value for the poor, poor shareholders. Oh no!

It really is incredible how much this rhymes with the crypto hype. To be fair, the technology does actually have uses but, as someone in the latter category, after I saw it in action, I quickly felt less worried about my job prospects.

Fortunately, enough people in charge of staffing seem to have listened to people with technical knowledge to not make my earlier prediction (mass layoffs directly due to LLMs, followed by mass, panicked re-hirings when said LLMs ruined the business) come true. But, the worry itself, along with the RTO pushes (not to mention exploitation of contractors and H1B holders) really underscore his desperately the industry needs to get organized. Hopefully, what’s going on in the games industry with IATSE gets more traction and more of my colleagues on the same page but, that’s one area where I’m not as optimistic as I’d like to be - I’ll just have to cheer on SAG, WGA, and UAW for the time being.

(For as much crap as I give Zuck for the other awful things they do, I do admire their commitment to open source.)

Absolutely agreed. There’s a surprising amount of good in the open source world that has come from otherwise ethically devoid companies. Even Intuit donated the Argo project, which has evolved from a cool workflow tool to a toolkit with far more. There is always the danger of EEE, however, so, we’ve got to stay vigilant.

AI is a tool to assist plagiarize the work of creators

Fixed it

LOL OK it’s a super-powerful technology that will one day generate tons of labor very quickly, but none of that changes that in order to train it to be able to do that, you have to feed it the work of actual creators- and for any of that to be cost-feasible, the creators can’t be paid for their inputs.

The whole thing is predicated on unpaid labor, stolen property.

Ever since the Internet Bubble crashed around 2000 that the business community in the Valley has been repeatedly trying to pump up a new bubble, starting with what they called Web 2.0 which started being hyped maybe even before the dust settled on tha crash after the first Tech bubble.

And if you think about it, it makes sense: the biggest fortunes ever made in Tech are still from companies which had their initial growth back then, such as Google, Amazon and even Paypal (Microsoft and Apple being maybe the most notable exceptions, both predating it).

So far I’ve only seen AI being used to fire employees that a company totally absolutely still needs but just doesn’t want to pay wages to. Companies are dumb as fuck, that’s my conclusion, but what else can you expect by organizations run by ladder-climbing CEO figures?

Things will live up to the hype and easily surpass it. That’s not the issue. The issue is that people take the world of today and imagine how much better/faster/richer they could become if they had AI. The crux is by the time they have AI, everybody else has it too. Thus it loses its competitive advantage. It just raises the baseline.

If I had to create the thousands of images I have generated with AI three years ago it would have costs thousands if not millions of dollar, a gigantic almost insurmountable task. But that doesn’t mean they have any value today. Everybody can produce similar images with a few clicks.

The whole point of AI is after all that it makes work that used to be difficult and expensive, cheap and easy, and nobody is going to pay huge amounts of money for a task that has become trivial.

What I’m curious is what’s going to happen to all these companies that went all-in on building data centers when they weren’t doing it previously. Places like Meta and Amazon are huge enough that it’s always been a sound investment but with this hype there are other companies trying to set up server farms with no real prize in sight.

Because people assume all these investors know what they are doing. They don’t. Now, some investors are good, but they usually don’t go for shit like this. At lot of investors are VCs, rich upper class twits, who can afford to lose money. Pure and simple. It’s like a bunch of lotto winners telling people they know how to pick numbers, betting outside bets once in a while, get lucky, and have selective bias.

Plus, they have enough money to hedge their bets. For example, say you invest $1mil in companies A, B, C, D, E, and F. All lose everything except A and B, which earn you $3mil each. You put in $6mil, got back $6mil. You broke even, tell people you knew what you were doing because you picked A and B, and conveniently never mention the rest. Then rich twits people invest in what YOU invest in. So you invest in H, others invest in H because you did, drives up the value. Now magnify this by a lot of investors, hundreds of letters, and it’s all like some weird game of luck and timing.

But a snapshot in time leads to your 2) ??? Point. Many know this is a confidence game, based on luck, charm, and timing. Some just stumble through it, and others are fleeced, but who cares? Daddy’s got money.

Money works different for rich people. It’s truly puzzling.

They sure as hell are doing a good job of making me reliant on AI though. Soon I’ll probably be payinf 200$ a month because i cant remember how to do things without AI. I think thats the plan anyway.