• Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Same thing happened to the Dot Com bubble. The fundamental technology has valid uses, but we’re in the stage where some people are convinced it can be used for literally anything.

    • ugjka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      It will burst because no one is going to pay subscription fee for every AI gizmo every app puts in your phone. The way they make any money now is just funneling more and more vc money in exchange of AGI promise (coming soon)

  • utopiah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Eh… “Robin Li says increased accuracy is one of the largest improvements we’ve seen in Artificial Intelligence. “I think over the past 18 months, that problem has pretty much been solved—meaning when you talk to a chatbot, a frontier model-based chatbot, you can basically trust the answer,” the CEO added.”

    That’s plain wrong. Even STOA black box chatbots give wrong answer to the simplest of questions sometimes. That’s precisely what NOT being able to trust mean.

    How can one believe anything this person is saying?

    • Benaaasaaas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      To trust a computer it has to be correct 100% of the time, because it can’t say “I don’t know”.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Same here. And speaking of bubbles I haven’t seen anything about NFTs in quite a while. I don’t think that bubble burst tho, it just sort of shriveled up and blew away.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    If you’re invested in these stocks, make sure you have your stop loss orders in place, 100%.

    I imagine the bubble bursting will be quick and deadly.

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I went to a AI conference and you can just sense how bogus it all feels. Like “Our patent pending AI system references billions of crowd-sourced data points to identify what you are craving for breakfast! Never think about breakfast again!”

      And as a engineer speaking with other engineers, we all collectively shrug and just keep taking the money. I’ll AI your toaster for enough money IDGAF.

          • Veneroso@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Playing the long game.

            Meanwhile… At the Intel board meeting… Qualcomm: (Unzips fly, unfurls testicles, placing them on the table for all to see) “I want to buy Intel”.

            • LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Lol that was never a serious option. Regulators would never allow it. But it was Qualcomm trying to flex for wall street to see.

  • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah, AI is really just a surveillance tool than anything else.

    When AI “creates” something, it’s just pulling up things related to words you typed in and making an amalgamation of what you typed in out of what it has.

    The real purpose is for corporations and governments to look through people’s devices and online storage at super speed.

    this is why you all need to be using end-to-end encrypted storage for everything and VPNs with perfect forward secrecy

    do your own research into the history of each provider of those things before you buy it

    • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      There is so much wrong with this…

      AI is a range of technologies. So yes, you can make surveillance with it, just like you can with a computer program like a virus. But obviously not all computer programs are viruses nor exist for surveillance. What a weird generalization. AI is used extensively in medical research, so your life might literally be saved by it one day.

      You’re most likely talking about “Chat Control”, which is a controversial EU proposal to scan either on people’s devices or from provider’s ends for dangerous and illegal content like CSAM. This is obviously a dystopian way to achieve that as it sacrifices literally everyone’s privacy to do it, and there is plenty to be said about that without randomly dragging AI into that. You can do this scanning without AI as well, and it doesn’t change anything about how dystopian it would be.

      You should be using end to end regardless, and a VPN is a good investment for making your traffic harder to discern, but if Chat Control is passed to operate on the device level you are kind of boned without circumventing this software, which would potentially be outlawed or made very difficult. It’s clear on it’s own that Chat Control is a bad thing, you don’t need some kind of conspiracy theory about ‘the true purpose of AI’ to see that.

  • don@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    They couldn’t keep their heads on fucking straight during the .com bubble, and here they are doing it all over again.

  • bluewing@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    No shit.

    Like all new technologies, there is a time when bunches of companies jump on the band wagon to get in on the action. You can see it all throughout the history of the industrial revolution.

    They mostly know that there will come a great weeding out of those that can’t handle the technology or just fail from poor management. But they are betting they will be among the 1% that wins the race and remain to dominate the market.

    The rest will just bide their time until the next Big Thing comes along. And the process starts over again.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah, but thanks to the glory of corporateworld, all the people involved in making these decisions will be in a higher position at a different company by the time the consequences come knocking.

    You definitely will not regret spending billions of dollars on GPUs and electricity bills.

  • poo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    245
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    No bubble has deserved to pop as much as AI deserves to

    • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      188
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      Blockchain and crypto were worse. „AI” has some actual use even if it’s way overblown.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        102
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Creating a specialized neural net to perform a specific function is cool. Slapping GPT into customer support because you like money is horse shit and I hope your company collapses. But yeah you’re right. Blockchain was a solution with basically no problems to fix. Neural nets are a tool that can do a ton of things, but everyone is content to use them as a hammer.

        • astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          39
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yes! “AI” defined as only LLMs and the party trick applications is a bubble. AI in general has been around for decades and will only continue to grow.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m glad you didn’t say NFTs because my Bored Ape will regain and triple its value any day now!

        • Graphy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          3 days ago

          Honestly kinda miss when the drugs I did were illegal. I used to buy weed from this online seller that was really into designer drugs. The amount of time I used to spend on Erowid just to figure out wtf I was about to take.

      • _bcron_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m not even understanding what AI is at this point because there’s no delineation between moderately sophisticated algorithms and things that are orders of magnitude more complex.

        I mean, if something like multisampling came out today we’d all know how it’d be marketed

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          AI is a ridiculous broad term these days. Everybody had been slapping the label on anything. It’s kinda like saying “transportation” and it means anything between babies crawling up to wrap drive and teleportation.

        • slacktoid@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          Technically speaking how I differentiate it is:

          • clever algorithm is a good heuristic
          • statistics on steroids is machine learning
          • using a transformer model is AI (for now)
        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          The AI buzzword means machine learning. You give it a massive dataset and it identifies correlations.

          Regular hand-coded AI is mostly simple state machines.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yes. But companies bought into AI way more than they bought into crypto though, in many outlandish and stupid ways. And many AI companies sell it in ways they shouldn’t.

      • confusedbytheBasics@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        3 days ago

        Blockchain has many valuable uses. A distributed zero trust ledger is useful. Sadly the finance scammers and the digital beanie baby collectors attracted all the marketing money.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          52
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          And yet, every single company that has ever tried to implement a distributed zero trust ledger into their products and processes has inevitably ditched the idea after releasing that it does not, in fact, provide any useful benefit.

          • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            It is exceptionally useful for the auditing of damn near everything in digital space, as long as shared resources and 3rd parties have access to the blockchain … which is probably the major reason corporations and politicians don’t want anything to do with it.

            It’d be a lot harder to hide crimes, fraud, grey business dealings, bribery and illegal donations, sanction violations, secret police slush funds, etc, etc if every event in the entire financial system and supply chain was logged and cryptographically verifiable.

            EDIT: NOTE I’m not talking about everyones transactions being in a public ledger (bad). Only enhancing the current system between businesses and orgs so it’s exceptionally difficult for any of them to falsify data without the others knowing, as well as having near instant visibility and analytics of the entire market (great for regulators, academics, etc).

            A supply-chain wide blockchain could enable individuals to view every raw material that went into every product they consume, down to the location, date — even the exact time in many cases — each was mined, refined, harvested, transported, picked, traded, etc. in a way that no individual corp could hide or falsify dramatically. Each corp and individuals true (embodied energy consumption would be visible to every buyer; developed world politicians and corporations couldn’t simply blame China and other developing countries for their own consumption.

            • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              26
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              The reason major businesses haven’t bothered using distributed blockchains for auditing is because they fundamentally do not actually help in any way with auditing.

              At the end of the day, the blockchain is just a ledger. At some point a person has to enter the information into that ledger.

              Now, hear me out here, because this is going to be some totally out there craziness that is going to blow your mind… What happens if that person lies?

              Like, you’ve built your huge, complicated system to track every banana you buy from the farm to the grocery store… But what happens if the shipper just sends you a different crate of bananas with the wrong label on them? How does your system solve that? What happens if the company growing your bananas claims to use only ethical practices but in reality their workers are effectively slaves? How does a blockchain help fix that?

              The data in a system is only as good as your ability to verify it. Verifying the integrity of the data within systems was largely a solved problem long before distributed blockchains came along, and was rarely if ever the primary avenue for fraud. It’s the human components of these systems where fraud can most easily occur. And distributed blockchains do absolutely nothing to solve that.

              • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Counterpoint, having a currency where every token is tied into its own transaction history might be unpopular with large businesses for other reasons. Like maybe they don’t want to be that transparent or accountable. The FBI have made public statements about how much easier it is to track criminals who used Crypto.

                Your opinion seems to contradict reality.

                • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  This is a very poorly considered argument. Even if we suppose that everything you’ve said is true, the existence of a second plausible explanation doesn’t invalidate the first. You’ve not actually offered any reason why any of what I said is wrong, you just said “X is possible, therefore Y cannot be true.”

                  Also, I want to note that this particular digression wasn’t about cryptocurrency at all. The point I was responding to was a claim that blockchains had uses other than as currencies. So you really might want to step back a bit and consider what you think is being discussed here, and what you’re actually trying to say.

        • Thrashy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 days ago

          The idea has merit, in theory – but in practice, in the vast majority of cases, having a trusted regulator managing the system, who can proactively step in to block or unwind suspicious activity, turns out to be vastly preferable to the “code is law” status quo of most blockchain implementations. Not to mention most potential applications really need a mechanism for transactions to clear in seconds, rather than minutes to days, and it’d be preferable if they didn’t need to boil the oceans dry in the process of doing so.

          If I was really reaching, I could maybe imagine a valid use case for say, a hypothetical, federated open source game that needed to have a trusted way for every node to validate the creation and trading of loot and items, that could serve as a layer of protection against cheating nodes duping items, for instance. But that’s insanely niche, and for nearly every other use case a database held by a trusted entity is faster, simpler, safer, more efficient, and easier to manage.

          • dragonlobster@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Your second point of trading loot and items got me thinking about my Steam CS:GO skins. Why should I trust a centralized entity like Steam who could at any moment decide to delete all my skins or remove my account for whatever reason with my skins, vs storing those skins in a wallet on a public blockchain for example to keep it’s value and always allow trading? Ofc there will always be a “centralized” smart contract but at least they can’t make changes to it if the smart contract code is audited ,

            • Thrashy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              In that case (as is the case with most games) the near-worst case scenario is that you are no worse off trusting Valve with the management of item data than you would be if it was in a public block chain. Why? Because those items are valueless outside the context of the commercial game they are used in. If Valve shuts down CS:GO tomorrow, owning your skins as a digital asset on a blockchain wouldn’t give you any more protection than the current status quo, because those skins are entirely dependent on the game itself to be used and viewed – it’d be akin to holding stock certificates for a company that’s already gone bankrupt and been liquidated: you have a token proving ownership of something that doesn’t exist anymore.

              Sure, there’s the edge case that if your Steam account got nukes from orbit by Gaben himself along with all its purchase and trading history you could still cash out on your skin collection, Conversely, having Valve – which, early VAC-ban wonkiness notwithstanding, has proven itself to be a generally-trustworthy operator of a digital games storefront for a couple decades now – hold the master database means that if your account got hacked and your stuff shifted off the account to others for profit, it’s much easier for Valve support to simply unwind those transactions and return your items to you. Infamously, in the case of blockchain ledgers, reversing a fraudulent transaction often requires forking the blockchain.

    • I think all the crypto scams, all the shitcoins, NFTs and other blockchain bullshit were much worse. At least AI companies usually don’t require you to give them large sums of money, they’re only after your data and absolutely fuck the environment by wasting absurd amounts of power, but they don’t try to take away your life savings

    • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      31
      ·
      3 days ago

      Try Venice Ai, free to use, won’t try to censor your topics. Still just a chat bot though (although I think it does image generation too).

        • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          The part where they were saying they don’t like the current AIs they know about. Showing disapproval of the trend.

            • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              No it’s a huge one, because it’s the most likely application of AI, AI site moderation will be the start of AI digital policing a field which risks growing larger and larger until it manifests as actual legal policing.

  • weew@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Yeah, but the 0.1% remaining will take over the world.

    Does anyone remember the era when there were a million search engines? Google didn’t spawn alone.

    Same with Amazon. You think nobody else tried to make an online store in the 90s? Lol.

    People are trying to vindicate their dislike of AI, pointing to trends like this as if it were supporting evidence. But saying “AI is going to be a big flop because 99% of companies today will end up failing” is as stupid as saying “online shopping will never work because 99% of online stores will close by the year 2010”

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Same with Amazon. You think nobody else tried to make an online store in the 90s? Lol.

      Fun fact: the first online store still exists. It’s Pizza Hut. They launched an experiment for online ordering in 1994. The first company to ever sell a product on the web.

      • wavebeam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yum brands has always been at the forefront of using tech to sell fast food. This was true then and is true now. Taco Bell has pioneered kiosks and in-app ordering as well as KDS in QSR environments.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        No one actually thought that they were a good idea it was just a bunch of con artists. It was a bubble for sure but it was an entirely artificially created one. There was no real business behind any of it.

        • figjam@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I would argue that this current AI bubble is artificially created by a different type of conmen.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yeah but in fairness the AI actually does work. You can actually use the AI to achieve things I’ve never seen anybody achieve anything beneficial with NFTs

            My argument really being that there is a potential for real benefit with AI in a way that never existed for made-up digital scarcity

            • figjam@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              I totally agree with you and once dudes with dollar signs in their eyes stop with craming it in toasters I will be very happy to see where the tech goes.

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      .com websites didn’t disappear after the dotcom bubble burst either. AI is definitely in a massive bubble right now, but something being in a bubble doesn’t mean it’s going to vanish completely. The AI companies with some substance backing them will weather the upcoming storm.

      Full disclosure: I don’t hate AI, but I hate that management-types are fellating themselves to the idea of it or the things than it can potentially do, rather than something that is providing them some kind of concrete benefit right now. I’m also mad at consumers for being stupid little sheep and paying a premium for anything that companies just happen to slap an “AI-powered” sticker on. It’s like organic produce 2.0 - you have to have it, but we can’t explain why, nor can we elaborate on what it does better than it’s contemporary.

    • Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I doubt anyone is downplaying that. People are just discussing how all companies are pushing A.I into products that don’t need it. Idk about you but I’m tired seeing A.I advertised as a feature on every app/site when it’s just a gpt wrapper.

      • LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        The rot has even spread into hardware. No one wants die space wasted on a stupid NPU with with less than 1/1000 of the computing power their GPU has and can’t be used for anything other than local LLMs which FTI very few people use and those that do tend to have powerful Nvidia GPUs.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I’m having flashbacks to Windows 8 being heavily developed to be “touch optimized” at a time where 3% of computers had touchscreen capabilities.

    • pup_atlas@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure, but the difference here was that all those companies were offering something different. Some had better results than others, a better ui, more accuracy in certain niches, etc. But 99% of AI companies now are all effectively reselling the OpenAI API. They aren’t making an effort to differentiate themselves at all. It’s as if Google was the only shop in town, and everyone bought all their search data an algorithms to slap their logo on. That’s just simply not sustainable at anywhere near the scale it is now. This won’t be a 3-5 year decline, it’ll be a 2 month crash.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Wrong audience for this message. Most on lemmy are still running with their fingers in their ears yelling la-la-la really loud.