4 ms·

This is true of and only if they actually create AGI. Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very g

This is true of and only if they actually create AGI. Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very good chat bots.

pseudosavant 2y ago
My cost is $20 a month for ChatGPT Plus, and the value I get out of that far exceeds $20. That is value creation, not destruction, right now. Not some imagined AGI future hypothetical.
- awwaiid 2y ago
  I think the idea is that it cost a lot more than $20/mo/user to create the tech, and that investment in the tech-creation won't be recouped by your tech-consumption. I think it depends on how far out you run the numbers for the area under the curve and all the various costs and profits. Seems clear to me that the individual tech-creation might end up being losses but that the net global will be gain very shortly as we continue to adapt and accelerate based on using the tech.
- kyruzic 2y ago
  And OpenAPI is spending more than $20 to provide you that service...
  - blactuary 2y ago
    Not to mention boiling the oceans
    - blactuary 2y ago
      Sad state of affairs that people downplay this part of the problem. The energy usage is insane
- blactuary 2y ago
  How much energy is being used to provide that $20 service?
itsoktocry 2y ago
>Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very good chat bots. It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. I'd argue these tools are already beyond "very good chat bots". And you think this is it? This is as far as we'll get with them, or AI? That's impossible to believe looking at history. Besides the fact that laying miles and miles of "excess" fibre was once seen as a bubble...
- alangibson 2y ago
  > It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. It's an incredibly good chat bot and code snippet generator. The more I use it the more I see how much of a stochastic parrot it is. It's usually not that hard to find the code it based it's response on on GitHub and Stack overflow if you've got time to kill.
  - itsoktocry 2y ago
    >Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. I think you're proving my point: long-time tech person who'd rather look stuff up on Stack Overflow, but yet uses the tool every day.
    - alangibson 2y ago
      What? I use ChatGPT so I dont have to look it up. And that's the point I've been making in this thread: GenAI is an incredible summarizer. But that's not nearly good enough to justify the investment and multiples were seeing now. Only AGI can justify the money being laid out right now. Without AGI companies like OpenAI have negative value because they will always loose money.
  - awwaiid 2y ago
    If you've got time to kill -- that says to me that it is faster, and therefore better. Time is money. How much time are we talking? If this is a 10x speed up on your research cycle then that sounds like a subtle revolution.

This is true of and only if they actually create AGI. Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very good chat bots.

pseudosavant 2y ago

My cost is $20 a month for ChatGPT Plus, and the value I get out of that far exceeds $20. That is value creation, not destruction, right now. Not some imagined AGI future hypothetical.

awwaiid 2y ago
I think the idea is that it cost a lot more than $20/mo/user to create the tech, and that investment in the tech-creation won't be recouped by your tech-consumption. I think it depends on how far out you run the numbers for the area under the curve and all the various costs and profits. Seems clear to me that the individual tech-creation might end up being losses but that the net global will be gain very shortly as we continue to adapt and accelerate based on using the tech.
kyruzic 2y ago
And OpenAPI is spending more than $20 to provide you that service...
- blactuary 2y ago
  Not to mention boiling the oceans
  - blactuary 2y ago
    Sad state of affairs that people downplay this part of the problem. The energy usage is insane
blactuary 2y ago
How much energy is being used to provide that $20 service?

itsoktocry 2y ago

>Otherwise it's value destroying given the huge costs associated with producing what are essentially very good chat bots. It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. I'd argue these tools are already beyond "very good chat bots". And you think this is it? This is as far as we'll get with them, or AI? That's impossible to believe looking at history. Besides the fact that laying miles and miles of "excess" fibre was once seen as a bubble...

alangibson 2y ago
> It's astonishing that anyone even tech-adjacent can say something like this. Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. It's an incredibly good chat bot and code snippet generator. The more I use it the more I see how much of a stochastic parrot it is. It's usually not that hard to find the code it based it's response on on GitHub and Stack overflow if you've got time to kill.
- itsoktocry 2y ago
  >Then I'll present my credentials. 25 years in tech and I use ChatGPT every day. I think you're proving my point: long-time tech person who'd rather look stuff up on Stack Overflow, but yet uses the tool every day.
  - alangibson 2y ago
    What? I use ChatGPT so I dont have to look it up. And that's the point I've been making in this thread: GenAI is an incredible summarizer. But that's not nearly good enough to justify the investment and multiples were seeing now. Only AGI can justify the money being laid out right now. Without AGI companies like OpenAI have negative value because they will always loose money.
- awwaiid 2y ago
  If you've got time to kill -- that says to me that it is faster, and therefore better. Time is money. How much time are we talking? If this is a 10x speed up on your research cycle then that sounds like a subtle revolution.