3 ms·

> If he's right about something in this field, it's by accident and not a result of experience or research. I could say the same thing about Elon Musk. /s In

by ath3nd 1y ago

> If he's right about something in this field, it's by accident and not a result of experience or research. I could say the same thing about Elon Musk. /s In all honesty though, there has to be some counterbalance to the faceless mass of AI enthusiast fanboys. In Ed's articles he is rightfully pointing out that these companies are burning a lot of cash and are extremely unprofitable at this very moment. Seeing that OpenAI's recent announcements were an office suite, a "study" mode, and ChatGPT4.001 while also claiming that AGI is just behind the corner, I think he smells bullshit, and I, for one am happy that he is calling it out. Adam Neumann from WeWork was also a visionary genius, and look how it turned out. The current AI diehards might have the habit of outsourcing some critical thinking to LLMs, but even they should be able to spot the red flags: unprofitabiliy with no clear profit window in sight, questionable launches, quick to squeeze the user base, no moat, and plateauing performance. My money is on Ed on this one.

tptacek 1y ago
Not that I want to start this particular kudzu subthread but: lots and lots of people say exactly that about Elon Musk.
fragmede 1y ago
Charging people to access their system is the obvious route to profitability, the only question is under what time window. Uber shows that money is able to be patient. There will be losers and there will be winners, but discounting the entire sector seems illogical.
- ath3nd 1y ago
  > Charging people to access their system is the obvious route to profitability Ed argues, and I agree with him, that there is simply no route to profitablility that makes sense numbers wise. Considering this is the only sector propping up the otherwise very bleak US economy currently, if there are indeed losers, the consequences would far surpass the 2008 financial crisis. And it will spread. Closing our eyes to the numbers, especially if they are that bad, and relying on vibes and promises of leaders that failed to deliver again and again (Musk's literally every promise recently, to Zuck's metaverse and superintelligence, to sama's ChatGPT recent releases and false promises of AGI). I know investors often invest based on vibes and hype (see Softbank and WeWork) but not paying attention to the numbers and hoping the balance sheets magically resolve themselves somehow has reached such a predominance that it starts resembling a cult.

by ath3nd 1y ago

tptacek 1y ago

Not that I want to start this particular kudzu subthread but: lots and lots of people say exactly that about Elon Musk.

fragmede 1y ago

Charging people to access their system is the obvious route to profitability, the only question is under what time window. Uber shows that money is able to be patient. There will be losers and there will be winners, but discounting the entire sector seems illogical.

ath3nd 1y ago
> Charging people to access their system is the obvious route to profitability Ed argues, and I agree with him, that there is simply no route to profitablility that makes sense numbers wise. Considering this is the only sector propping up the otherwise very bleak US economy currently, if there are indeed losers, the consequences would far surpass the 2008 financial crisis. And it will spread. Closing our eyes to the numbers, especially if they are that bad, and relying on vibes and promises of leaders that failed to deliver again and again (Musk's literally every promise recently, to Zuck's metaverse and superintelligence, to sama's ChatGPT recent releases and false promises of AGI). I know investors often invest based on vibes and hype (see Softbank and WeWork) but not paying attention to the numbers and hoping the balance sheets magically resolve themselves somehow has reached such a predominance that it starts resembling a cult.