• eicker@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    OpenAI promised investors an AI gold rush. Now its projected annual revenue is reportedly $20 billion below earlier expectations. That’s not a rounding error: that’s an entire business empire missing from the spreadsheet. Silicon Valley keeps calling it a revolution, but increasingly it looks like a trillion dollar game of musical chairs, with investors hoping the music never stops.

  • Akh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    WeWork was declared a failure when it lost 6 billion in a year. OpenAI is net negative 17 billion a year…

    • ceenote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes, but consider that AI being successful would maybe let your boss fire you, and they super duper want to fire you and everyone.

    • darvocet@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is quite a difference from an investor standpoint in a product that replaces all human labor vs coworking space.

          • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Let’s say for a moment that AI really is as capable as AI bros want you to believe it is. Having used some AI models at my work (network engineer), I’m not so convinced, but I’ll put that aside for a moment.

            The pinch of the AI vise is going to be the cost. All the AI companies are running at loss to try and capture the market, and they’ll need to charge a lot more for access to AI once a winner is determined.

            Are you willing to pay 10x what you pay right now for access to an AI agent? Because that’s looking like what they’ll have to do in order to turn these companies profitable.

            • Sturgist@piefed.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Are you willing to pay 10x what you pay right now for access

              That’s really the crux of the matter. Regardless of if it’s fit for purpose to replace paid labour, is it actually financially viable in any way to replace humans with an AI model that works but costs several times more than a human work force while not being able to be held legally accountable.

              • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                If this future AI agent solves the task at a fraction of the time, it can still be financially viable at several times the cost.

                • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  That only makes sense if money is made on the output. What you’re basically saying is X Toy Company will make more money if they make more toys. What you’re forgetting is that there has to be a demand for those toys. So X Toy Company can’t replace workers with AI unless there’s more demand for the toys than there is currently able to be fulfilled and there’s no evidence for that across all sectors of the economy.

  • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I believe the implosion of the AI bubble will essentially torpedo the only thing still supporting the US economy?

    • krisevol@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes. When the bubble finally pops it means AI is here to stay and the remaining companies will probably climb 100x over the next two decades, but all the people currently invested will lose almost everything. The people not invested will still feel the effect as the layoffs and bankruptcies start rolling out, and anyone pension or retirement that is tied to bubble will lose a lot of value.

      This will come right as the bond market is reaching the point of no return, and the US won’t be able to pay back the debt. A lot of people are going to lose everything, including their retirements during the debt liquidation that is coming.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        it means AI is here to stay

        Maybe. Or maybe LLMs will just go tits up. Don’t pretend you can predict the future.

      • moustachio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        AI will “stay” in what form? Local models? The companies selling it are almost certainly going to lose their over 100 lawsuits of copyright infringement they’re 100% guilty of. I’m sure local models will be utilized, but not these LLM snake oil salesman’s products anymore.

    • bedwyr@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Unfortunately, nothing is too big to bail for these clowns in power, borrowing money on America’s Credit is like their reason for being, all the lawmakers save few as well as the administration that will of course need to be bribed and paid a percentage of all bail out money.

      I bet they can hit 70 trillion in debt by 2029.

      • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        As much as this sucks, I’m kind of, quite frankly, okay with it. Because I’ve decided that holding fiat currency isn’t worth doing. I hold my money in real hard money and then only convert what I need back to fiat when I need it.

        They can bail out and inflate all they want, but they’re not going to be able to reduce my purchasing power.

        I don’t know who will pay the bill for it, but I do know that it won’t be me.

        • bedwyr@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well keep in mind gold mining is incredibly destructive, poisoning the land. The illegal mining uses a lot of mercury, the large gold mines harvest ores whereby they use cyanide or something to seperate the gold, and in the process free a bunch of arsenic and such.

          Silver is better I think. Also though, gold is way overpriced it would appear, 3,000 some dollars an ounce, it was less than 100 in 2001.

          The traditional value of gold is one for every 15 silver, if the ratio is off, you aren’t getting great value.

          But what could be the best, would be metals like platinum and pallidium, which have actual uses as catalysts in chemical processes.

          • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            30 days ago

            The traditional value of gold is one for every 15 silver, if the ratio is off, you aren’t getting great value.

            The traditional value of buggy whips was stable until there was no longer any demand for them.

            The value of gold in Spain in the 16th century went down the shitter and there was hyperinflation of gold-based currency, because of the flood of gold looted from the Americas.

            Traditional ratios are meaningless rules of thumb with no basis in fact.

            There is no such thing as intrinsic value.

            • bedwyr@piefed.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              30 days ago

              I disagree and think those ratios do exist, and when they are off it shows a problem brewing in the economy. It is way the fuck off now, and shit is about to crash in case you didn’t realize that.

              But regardless, gold sucks, silver better, as gold is overvalued now.

  • MortUS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah… I’m sure the bubble will pop any minute now.

    Just like the Housing bubble.

    And the Crypto bubble.

    This article is conditioning.

  • Riskable@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Given the monumental difference between those two figures, investors across the world of finance are taking it as a sign that demand for AI is much lower than previously thought

    No. Demand for OpenAI’s services is lower than they thought.

    Every day, the open weights models get smarter and cheaper and new competitors are coming online every few weeks. They cost a fraction of what OpenAI charges.

    Demand for AI products and services is continuing to grow at a break-the-world pace. It’s just these big “AI first movers” are in trouble because it’s too easy to copy what they do. They expected an enormous “first mover advantage” (which is a real thing) but it turns out that AI is trivial to train and replicate (just have to scrape the Internet and scan a lot of books).

    In other words, it’s turning out that “first mover” is a disadvantage in this (AI) industry.

    • cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I wouldn’t believe that hype

      I am the only person in my circle using open weight models.

      Normies out number us by a large amount and none of them really are running their own things.

      • Riskable@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Individuals using AI are a tiny drop in the bucket. Think bigger: Businesses and government.

        There’s government agencies racking up token usages to the point where Google had to build an entire data center on Christmas Island (the place with the cool crabs) and that still won’t be enough! And that’s just one government!

        Companies are using AI in automations now and it’s working so well that they’re willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars a month (on tokens) just on that one automation.

        These usages are where demand is growing. Not regular people or even developers using AI to help them write code.

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    After the initial dot com boom and bust (remenber pets.com?) I remember being told laptops and desktops were dead and we’d all be using tablets. Metaverse, google glass, self driving vehicles real soon, theranos will transform health care, NFTs, crypto. And now AI. Its all just a repeating toilet bowl swirl of empty speculation, exactly like a casino. And not a single one of those things came to much. I wonder if AI will leave much progress behind when it implodes. Maybe this time itll be different?

    • Bluewing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      AI IS a useful tool for some things, just not everything. So it ain’t going away. Just as the “cloud” is still with us. Or email. Anyone remember when every ISP had their own email?

      Every new idea goes through the process of catching on, stupid rapid growth, and then the weeding out of 90+ % of them, and finally the stabilizing the market for those that actually need and use it. Whether is cars, TVs, Cell phones, or AI, every hot new idea goes through this process.

      • mHtt@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        its a useful tool in the way each car should have a nuclear reactor engine. cool idea but the execution is too resource heavy…

        draining lakes for cat videos is NOT the future u dunderpate

        The juice isn’t worth the squeeze

  • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    The company I work does pretty basic analysis. Its certainly an “every day” application. It’s been two or three years they’ve been Investing large amounts of money into this, and it can’t do shit. We have been “training” it for faaaaaar longer than it would take to train a human to do these things. Plus, they’ve torn it apart and completely restarted the process at least twice, to my knowledge. Zero efficiencies, very little practical capability. I hear that it’s great at coding and math, I’ve seen it do word processing pretty good, but these assholes oversold it’s capabilities to the managerial class, and they fucking took it. Hook, line, and sinker.

    • moustachio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not even that good at coding. It has to be heavily curated and focused to output somewhat “correct” code, it is full of gaps that lead to lots of bugs and missed scopes that a human would bring up if they wrote it themselves, and the output is incredibly verbose and inefficient (and harder for engineers to read).

      It’s subpar at everything, there are no areas it shines.