18 ms·

It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted. A couple of years

It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted. A couple of years ago, I asked a financial investment person about AI as a trick question. She did well by recommending investing in companies that invest in AI (like MS) but who had other profitable businesses (like Azure). I was waiting for her to put her foot in her mouth and buy into the hype.She skillfully navigated the question in a way that won my respect. I personally believe that a lot of investment money is going to evaporate before the market resets. What we're calling AI will continue to have certain uses, but investors will realize that the moonshot being promised is undeliverable and a lot of jobs will disappear. This will hurt the wider industry, and the economy by extension.

mrits 1y ago
I think we will see the opposite. If we made no progress with LLMs we'd still have huge advancements and growth opportunities enhancing the workflows and tuning them to domain specific tasks.
- evilduck 1y ago
  I think you could both be right at the same time. We will see a large number of VC funded AI startup companies and feature clones vanish soon, and we will also see current or future LLMs continue to make inroads into existing business processes and increase productivity and profitability. Personally, I think what we will witness is consolidation and winner-takes-all scenarios. There just isn't a sustainable market for 15 VS Code forks all copying each other along with all other non-VS Code IDEs cloning those features in as fast as possible. There isn't space for Claude Code, Gemini CLI, Qwen Code, Opencode all doing basically the same thing with their special branding when the thing they're actually selling is a commoditized LLM API. Hell, there _probably_ isn't space for OpenAI and Anthropic and Google and Mistral and DeepSeek and Alibaba and whoever else, all fundamentally creating and doing the same thing globally. Every single software vendor can't innovate and integrate AI features faster than AI companies themselves can build better tooling to automate that company's tools for them. It reeks of the 90's when there were a dozen totally viable but roughly equal search engines. One vendor will eventually pull ahead or have a slightly longer runway and claim the whole thing.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- sebstefan 1y ago
  I agree with this, but how will these companies make money? Short of a breakthrough, the consumer isn't ready to pay for it, and even if they were, open source models just catch up. My feelings are that most of the "huge advancements" are not going to benefit the people selling AI. I'd put my money on those who sell the pickaxes, and the companies who have a way to use this new tech to deliver more value.
  - Schiendelman 1y ago
    The people who make money serving in users will be the one with the best integrations. Those are harder to do, require business relationships, and are massively differentiating. You'll probably have a player that sells privacy as well.
  - thinkharderdev 1y ago
    Yeah, I've always found it a bit puzzling how companies like OpenAI/Anthropic have such high valuations. Like what is the actual business model? You can sell inference-as-a-service of course but given that there are a half-dozen SOTA frontier models and the compute cost of inference is still very high it just seems like there is no margin in it. Nvidia captures so much value on the compute infrastructure and competition pushes prices down for inference and what is left?
- OtherShrezzing 1y ago
  I don't see how this works, as the costs of running inference is so much higher than the revenues earned by the frontier labs. Anthropic and OpenAI don't continue to exist long-term in a world where GPT-5 and Claude 4.1 cost-quality models are SOTA.
  - HDThoreaun 1y ago
    With gpt5 I’m not sure this is true. Certainly openAI is still losing money but if they stopped research and just focused on productionizing inference use cases I think they’d be profitable.
    - epicureanideal 1y ago
      > if they stopped research and just focused on productionizing inference use cases I think they’d be profitable For a couple of years, until someone who did keep doing research pulled ahead a bit with a similarly good UI.
    - criddell 1y ago
      But would they be profitable enough? They've taken on more than $50 billion of investment. I think it's relatively easy for Meta to plow billions into AI. Last quarter their revenue was something like $15 billion. Open AI will be lucky to generate that over the next year.
      - HDThoreaun 1y ago
        meta net profit last quarter was over $18 billion so yea the big tech players definitely have a lot more runway
torginus 1y ago
It boggles the mind that this kind of management is what it takes to create one of the most valuable companies in the world (and becoming one of the world's richest in the process).
- saubeidl 1y ago
  It all makes much more sense when you start to realize that capitalism is a casino in which the already rich have a lot more chips to bet and meritocracy is a comforting lie.
  - aspenmayer 1y ago
    > meritocracy is a comforting lie. Meritocracy used to be a dirty word, before my time, of course, but for different reasons than you may think. Think about the racial quotas in college admissions and you’ll maybe see why the powers that be didn’t want merit to be a determining factor at that time. Now that the status quo is in charge of college admissions, we don’t need those quotas generally, and yet meritocracy still can’t save us. The problem of merit is that we rarely need the best person for a given job, and those with means can be groomed their entire life to do that job, if it’s profitable enough. Work shouldn’t be charity either, as work needs to get done, after all, and it’s called work instead of charity or slavery for good reasons, but being too good at your job at your current pay rate can make you unpromotable, which is a trap just as hard to see as the trap of meritocracy. Meritocracy is ego-stroking writ large if you get picked, just so we can remind you that you’re just the best one for our job that applied, and we can replace you at any time, likely for less money.
- jocaal 1y ago
  Past a certain point, skill doesn't contribute to the magnitude of success and it becomes all luck. There are plenty of smart people on earth, but there can only be 1 founder of facebook.
  - vovavili 1y ago
    Plenty of smart people prefer not to try their luck, though. A smart but risk-avoidant person will never be the one to create Facebook either.
miki123211 1y ago
I have an overwhelming feeling that what we're trying to do here is "Netflix over DialUp." We're clearly seeing what AI will eventually be able to do, just like many VOD, smartphone and grocery delivery companies of the 90s did with the internet. The groundwork has been laid, and it's not too hard to see the shape of things to come. This tech, however, is still far too immature for a lot of use cases. There's enough of it available that things feel like they ought to work, but we aren't quite there yet. It's not quite useless, there's a lot you can do with AI already, but a lot of use cases that are obvious not only in retrospect will only be possible once it matures.
- nutjob2 1y ago
  > We're clearly seeing what AI will eventually be able to do I think this is one of the major mistakes of this cycle. People assume that AI will scale and improve like many computing things before it, but there is already evidence scaling isn't working and people are putting a lot of faith in models (LLMs) structurally unsuited to the task. Of course that doesn't mean that people won't keep exploiting the hype with hand-wavy claims.
- skeezyboy 1y ago
  >I have an overwhelming feeling that what we're trying to do here is "Netflix over DialUp." I totally agree with you... though the other day, I did think the same thing about the 8bit era of video games.
  - echelon 1y ago
    Speaking of Netflix - I think the image, video, audio, world model, diffusion domains should be treated 100% separately from LLMs. They are not the same thing. Image and video AI is nothing short of revolutionary. It's already having huge impact and it's disrupting every single business it touches. I've spoken with hundreds of medium and large businesses about it. They're changing how they bill clients and budget projects. It's already here and real. For example, a studio that does over ten million in revenue annually used to bill ~$300k for commercial spots. Pharmaceutical, P&G, etc. Or HBO title sequences. They're now bidding ~$50k and winning almost everything they bid on. They're taking ten times the workload.
hearsathought 1y ago
> It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted. If AI is going to be integral to society going forward, how is it shortsighted? > She did well by recommending investing in companies that invest in AI (like MS) but who had other profitable businesses (like Azure). So you prefer a 2x gain rather than 10X gain from the likes of Nvidia or Broadcom? You should check how much better META has done compared to MSFT the past few years. Also a "financial investment person"? The anecdote feels made up. > She skillfully navigated the question in a way that won my respect. She won your respect by giving you advice that led to far less returns than you could have gotten otherwise? > I personally believe that a lot of investment money is going to evaporate before the market resets. But you believe investing in MSFT was a better AI play than going with the "hype" even when objective facts show otherwise. Why should any care what you think about AI, investments and the market when you clearly know nothing about it?
baby 1y ago
As someone using LLMs daily, it's always interesting to read something about AI being a bubble or just hype. I think you're going to miss the train, I am personally convinced this is the technology of our lifetime.
- conartist6 1y ago
  I'll say it again since I've said it a million times, it can be useful and a bubble. The logic of investors before the last market crash was something like "houses are useful, so no amount of hype around the housing market could be a bubble"
  - Windchaser 1y ago
    Or, quite similarly, the internet bubble of the large ‘90s Very obviously the internet is useful, and has radically changed our lives. Also obviously, most of the high stock valuations of the ‘90s didn’t pan out.
- GoatInGrey 1y ago
  You are welcome to share how AI has transformed a revenue generating role. Personally, I have never seen a durable example of it, despite my excitement with the tech. In my world, AI has been little more than a productivity boost in very narrowly scoped areas. For instance, generating an initial data mapping of source data against a manually built schema for the individual to then review and clean up. In this case, AI is helping the individual get results faster, but they're still "doing" data migrations themselves. AI is simply a tool in their toolbox.
  - cm2012 1y ago
    I know a company that replaced their sales call center with an AI calling bot instead. The bot got better sales and higher feedback scores from customers.
    - rs186 1y ago
blitzar 1y ago
> record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI That was soooo 2 weeks ago.
throawaywpg 1y ago
The line was to buy Amazon as it was undervalued a la IBM or Apple based on its cloud computing capabilities relative to the future (projected) needs of AI.
epolanski 1y ago
> A couple of years ago, I asked a financial investment person about AI as a trick question. Why do you assume this people know any better than average Joe on the street? Study after study demonstrates they can't even keep up with the market benchmarks, how would they be any wiser to tell you what's a fad or not.
- quantified 1y ago
  I think the point of the question was to differentiate this person from the average Jane on the Street.
  - epolanski 1y ago
    But half the Janes will hold similar views and positions.
    - quantified 1y ago
      You missed my pun on Jane Street.
baxtr 1y ago
> …lot of jobs will disappear. So it’s true that AI will kill jobs, but not in the way they’ve imagined?!
hbosch 1y ago
>It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted. Everything zuck has done since the "dawn of AI" has been to intentionally subvert and sabotage existing AI players, because otherwise Meta would be too far behind. In the same way that AI threatens Search, we are seeing emergently that AI is also threatening social networks -- you can get companionship, advice, information, emotional validation, etc. directly from an AI. People are forming serious relationships with these things in as much a real way as you would with anyone else on Facebook or Instagram. Not to mention, how long before most of the "people" on those platforms are AI themselves? I believe exactly 0 percent of the decision to make Llama open-source and free was done altruistically as much as it was simply to try and push the margins of Anthropic, OpenAI, etc. downward. Indeed, I feel like even the fearmongering of this article is also strategically intended to devalue AI incumbents. AI is very much an existential threat to Meta. Is AI currently fulfilling the immense hype around it? In my opinion, maybe not, but the potential value is obvious. Much more obvious than, for example, NFTs and crypto just a few years ago.
- azinman2 1y ago
  > AI is very much an existential threat to Meta. How so?
  - hdgvhicv 1y ago
    “you can get companionship, advice, information, emotional validation, etc. directly from an AI. People are forming serious relationships with these things in as much a real way as you would with anyone else on Facebook or Instagram. Not to mention, how long before most of the "people" on those platforms are AI themselves?”
    - azinman2 1y ago
      Meta doesn’t really serve companionship. It used to make Yu connected to others in your social graph, which AI cannot replace. If IG still has the eyeballs, people can put AI generated content on it with or without meta’s permission. Like with most things, people will want what’s expensive and not what’s cheap. AI is cheap, real humans are not. Why buy diamonds when you can’t tell the difference with cubic zirconia? And yet demand for diamonds only increases.
snihalani 1y ago
When will the investors run out of money and stop funding hypes?
FrustratedMonky 1y ago
"little shortsighted" Or, this knowingly could not be sustained. So they scooped up all the talent they wanted before anybody could react, all at once, with big carrots. And then hit pause button to let all that new talent figure out the next step.
raydev 1y ago
> It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted Or the more likely explanation is that they feel they've completed the hiring necessary to figure out what's next.
StopDisinfo910 1y ago
> A couple of years ago, I asked a financial investment person about AI as a trick question. She did well by recommending investing in companies that invest in AI (like MS) but who had other profitable businesses (like Azure) If you had actually invested in AI pure players and Nvidia, the shovel seller, a couple years ago and were selling today, you would have made a pretty penny. The hard thing with potential bubbles is not entirely avoiding them, it’s being there early enough and not being left at the end holding the bag.
- bcrosby95 1y ago
  Financial advisors usually work on wholistic plans not short term ones. It isn't about timing markets its about a steady hand that doesn't panic and makes sure you don't get caught with your pants down when you need cash.
  - what_ever 1y ago
    Hard to know what OP asked for but if they asked for AI specifically, the advise does not need to be holistic.
- aksss 1y ago
  Are you bearish on the shovel seller? Is now the time to sell out? I'm still +40% on nvda - quite late to the game but people still seem to be buying the shovels.
  - StopDisinfo910 1y ago
    I have absolutely no clue whatsoever. I have zero insider information. For all I know, the bubble could pop tomorrow or we might be at the beginning of a shift of a similar magnitude to the industrial revolution. If I could reliably tell, I wouldn’t tell you anyway. I would be getting rich. I’m just amused by people who think they are financially more clever by taking conservative positions. At that point, just buy ETF. That’s even more diversification that buying Microsoft.
  - BrawnyBadger53 1y ago
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
la64710 1y ago
Correction if I may: Lot of AI jobs will disappear. Lot of usual jobs that were put on hold will return. This is good news for most of humankind.

mrits 1y ago

I think we will see the opposite. If we made no progress with LLMs we'd still have huge advancements and growth opportunities enhancing the workflows and tuning them to domain specific tasks.

evilduck 1y ago
I think you could both be right at the same time. We will see a large number of VC funded AI startup companies and feature clones vanish soon, and we will also see current or future LLMs continue to make inroads into existing business processes and increase productivity and profitability. Personally, I think what we will witness is consolidation and winner-takes-all scenarios. There just isn't a sustainable market for 15 VS Code forks all copying each other along with all other non-VS Code IDEs cloning those features in as fast as possible. There isn't space for Claude Code, Gemini CLI, Qwen Code, Opencode all doing basically the same thing with their special branding when the thing they're actually selling is a commoditized LLM API. Hell, there _probably_ isn't space for OpenAI and Anthropic and Google and Mistral and DeepSeek and Alibaba and whoever else, all fundamentally creating and doing the same thing globally. Every single software vendor can't innovate and integrate AI features faster than AI companies themselves can build better tooling to automate that company's tools for them. It reeks of the 90's when there were a dozen totally viable but roughly equal search engines. One vendor will eventually pull ahead or have a slightly longer runway and claim the whole thing.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
sebstefan 1y ago
I agree with this, but how will these companies make money? Short of a breakthrough, the consumer isn't ready to pay for it, and even if they were, open source models just catch up. My feelings are that most of the "huge advancements" are not going to benefit the people selling AI. I'd put my money on those who sell the pickaxes, and the companies who have a way to use this new tech to deliver more value.
- Schiendelman 1y ago
  The people who make money serving in users will be the one with the best integrations. Those are harder to do, require business relationships, and are massively differentiating. You'll probably have a player that sells privacy as well.
- thinkharderdev 1y ago
  Yeah, I've always found it a bit puzzling how companies like OpenAI/Anthropic have such high valuations. Like what is the actual business model? You can sell inference-as-a-service of course but given that there are a half-dozen SOTA frontier models and the compute cost of inference is still very high it just seems like there is no margin in it. Nvidia captures so much value on the compute infrastructure and competition pushes prices down for inference and what is left?
OtherShrezzing 1y ago
I don't see how this works, as the costs of running inference is so much higher than the revenues earned by the frontier labs. Anthropic and OpenAI don't continue to exist long-term in a world where GPT-5 and Claude 4.1 cost-quality models are SOTA.
- HDThoreaun 1y ago
  With gpt5 I’m not sure this is true. Certainly openAI is still losing money but if they stopped research and just focused on productionizing inference use cases I think they’d be profitable.
  - epicureanideal 1y ago
    > if they stopped research and just focused on productionizing inference use cases I think they’d be profitable For a couple of years, until someone who did keep doing research pulled ahead a bit with a similarly good UI.
  - criddell 1y ago
    But would they be profitable enough? They've taken on more than $50 billion of investment. I think it's relatively easy for Meta to plow billions into AI. Last quarter their revenue was something like $15 billion. Open AI will be lucky to generate that over the next year.
    - HDThoreaun 1y ago
      meta net profit last quarter was over $18 billion so yea the big tech players definitely have a lot more runway

torginus 1y ago

It boggles the mind that this kind of management is what it takes to create one of the most valuable companies in the world (and becoming one of the world's richest in the process).

saubeidl 1y ago
It all makes much more sense when you start to realize that capitalism is a casino in which the already rich have a lot more chips to bet and meritocracy is a comforting lie.
- aspenmayer 1y ago
  > meritocracy is a comforting lie. Meritocracy used to be a dirty word, before my time, of course, but for different reasons than you may think. Think about the racial quotas in college admissions and you’ll maybe see why the powers that be didn’t want merit to be a determining factor at that time. Now that the status quo is in charge of college admissions, we don’t need those quotas generally, and yet meritocracy still can’t save us. The problem of merit is that we rarely need the best person for a given job, and those with means can be groomed their entire life to do that job, if it’s profitable enough. Work shouldn’t be charity either, as work needs to get done, after all, and it’s called work instead of charity or slavery for good reasons, but being too good at your job at your current pay rate can make you unpromotable, which is a trap just as hard to see as the trap of meritocracy. Meritocracy is ego-stroking writ large if you get picked, just so we can remind you that you’re just the best one for our job that applied, and we can replace you at any time, likely for less money.
jocaal 1y ago
Past a certain point, skill doesn't contribute to the magnitude of success and it becomes all luck. There are plenty of smart people on earth, but there can only be 1 founder of facebook.
- vovavili 1y ago
  Plenty of smart people prefer not to try their luck, though. A smart but risk-avoidant person will never be the one to create Facebook either.

miki123211 1y ago

I have an overwhelming feeling that what we're trying to do here is "Netflix over DialUp." We're clearly seeing what AI will eventually be able to do, just like many VOD, smartphone and grocery delivery companies of the 90s did with the internet. The groundwork has been laid, and it's not too hard to see the shape of things to come. This tech, however, is still far too immature for a lot of use cases. There's enough of it available that things feel like they ought to work, but we aren't quite there yet. It's not quite useless, there's a lot you can do with AI already, but a lot of use cases that are obvious not only in retrospect will only be possible once it matures.

nutjob2 1y ago
> We're clearly seeing what AI will eventually be able to do I think this is one of the major mistakes of this cycle. People assume that AI will scale and improve like many computing things before it, but there is already evidence scaling isn't working and people are putting a lot of faith in models (LLMs) structurally unsuited to the task. Of course that doesn't mean that people won't keep exploiting the hype with hand-wavy claims.
skeezyboy 1y ago
>I have an overwhelming feeling that what we're trying to do here is "Netflix over DialUp." I totally agree with you... though the other day, I did think the same thing about the 8bit era of video games.
- echelon 1y ago
  Speaking of Netflix - I think the image, video, audio, world model, diffusion domains should be treated 100% separately from LLMs. They are not the same thing. Image and video AI is nothing short of revolutionary. It's already having huge impact and it's disrupting every single business it touches. I've spoken with hundreds of medium and large businesses about it. They're changing how they bill clients and budget projects. It's already here and real. For example, a studio that does over ten million in revenue annually used to bill ~$300k for commercial spots. Pharmaceutical, P&G, etc. Or HBO title sequences. They're now bidding ~$50k and winning almost everything they bid on. They're taking ten times the workload.

hearsathought 1y ago

> It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted. If AI is going to be integral to society going forward, how is it shortsighted? > She did well by recommending investing in companies that invest in AI (like MS) but who had other profitable businesses (like Azure). So you prefer a 2x gain rather than 10X gain from the likes of Nvidia or Broadcom? You should check how much better META has done compared to MSFT the past few years. Also a "financial investment person"? The anecdote feels made up. > She skillfully navigated the question in a way that won my respect. She won your respect by giving you advice that led to far less returns than you could have gotten otherwise? > I personally believe that a lot of investment money is going to evaporate before the market resets. But you believe investing in MSFT was a better AI play than going with the "hype" even when objective facts show otherwise. Why should any care what you think about AI, investments and the market when you clearly know nothing about it?

baby 1y ago

As someone using LLMs daily, it's always interesting to read something about AI being a bubble or just hype. I think you're going to miss the train, I am personally convinced this is the technology of our lifetime.

conartist6 1y ago
I'll say it again since I've said it a million times, it can be useful and a bubble. The logic of investors before the last market crash was something like "houses are useful, so no amount of hype around the housing market could be a bubble"
- Windchaser 1y ago
  Or, quite similarly, the internet bubble of the large ‘90s Very obviously the internet is useful, and has radically changed our lives. Also obviously, most of the high stock valuations of the ‘90s didn’t pan out.
GoatInGrey 1y ago
You are welcome to share how AI has transformed a revenue generating role. Personally, I have never seen a durable example of it, despite my excitement with the tech. In my world, AI has been little more than a productivity boost in very narrowly scoped areas. For instance, generating an initial data mapping of source data against a manually built schema for the individual to then review and clean up. In this case, AI is helping the individual get results faster, but they're still "doing" data migrations themselves. AI is simply a tool in their toolbox.
- cm2012 1y ago
  I know a company that replaced their sales call center with an AI calling bot instead. The bot got better sales and higher feedback scores from customers.
  - rs186 1y ago

blitzar 1y ago

> record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI That was soooo 2 weeks ago.

throawaywpg 1y ago

The line was to buy Amazon as it was undervalued a la IBM or Apple based on its cloud computing capabilities relative to the future (projected) needs of AI.

epolanski 1y ago

> A couple of years ago, I asked a financial investment person about AI as a trick question. Why do you assume this people know any better than average Joe on the street? Study after study demonstrates they can't even keep up with the market benchmarks, how would they be any wiser to tell you what's a fad or not.

quantified 1y ago
I think the point of the question was to differentiate this person from the average Jane on the Street.
- epolanski 1y ago
  But half the Janes will hold similar views and positions.
  - quantified 1y ago
    You missed my pun on Jane Street.

baxtr 1y ago

> …lot of jobs will disappear. So it’s true that AI will kill jobs, but not in the way they’ve imagined?!

hbosch 1y ago

>It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted. Everything zuck has done since the "dawn of AI" has been to intentionally subvert and sabotage existing AI players, because otherwise Meta would be too far behind. In the same way that AI threatens Search, we are seeing emergently that AI is also threatening social networks -- you can get companionship, advice, information, emotional validation, etc. directly from an AI. People are forming serious relationships with these things in as much a real way as you would with anyone else on Facebook or Instagram. Not to mention, how long before most of the "people" on those platforms are AI themselves? I believe exactly 0 percent of the decision to make Llama open-source and free was done altruistically as much as it was simply to try and push the margins of Anthropic, OpenAI, etc. downward. Indeed, I feel like even the fearmongering of this article is also strategically intended to devalue AI incumbents. AI is very much an existential threat to Meta. Is AI currently fulfilling the immense hype around it? In my opinion, maybe not, but the potential value is obvious. Much more obvious than, for example, NFTs and crypto just a few years ago.

azinman2 1y ago
> AI is very much an existential threat to Meta. How so?
- hdgvhicv 1y ago
  “you can get companionship, advice, information, emotional validation, etc. directly from an AI. People are forming serious relationships with these things in as much a real way as you would with anyone else on Facebook or Instagram. Not to mention, how long before most of the "people" on those platforms are AI themselves?”
  - azinman2 1y ago
    Meta doesn’t really serve companionship. It used to make Yu connected to others in your social graph, which AI cannot replace. If IG still has the eyeballs, people can put AI generated content on it with or without meta’s permission. Like with most things, people will want what’s expensive and not what’s cheap. AI is cheap, real humans are not. Why buy diamonds when you can’t tell the difference with cubic zirconia? And yet demand for diamonds only increases.

snihalani 1y ago

When will the investors run out of money and stop funding hypes?

FrustratedMonky 1y ago

"little shortsighted" Or, this knowingly could not be sustained. So they scooped up all the talent they wanted before anybody could react, all at once, with big carrots. And then hit pause button to let all that new talent figure out the next step.

raydev 1y ago

> It almost seems as though the record-setting bonuses they were dolling out to hire the top minds in AI might have been a little shortsighted Or the more likely explanation is that they feel they've completed the hiring necessary to figure out what's next.

StopDisinfo910 1y ago

> A couple of years ago, I asked a financial investment person about AI as a trick question. She did well by recommending investing in companies that invest in AI (like MS) but who had other profitable businesses (like Azure) If you had actually invested in AI pure players and Nvidia, the shovel seller, a couple years ago and were selling today, you would have made a pretty penny. The hard thing with potential bubbles is not entirely avoiding them, it’s being there early enough and not being left at the end holding the bag.

bcrosby95 1y ago
Financial advisors usually work on wholistic plans not short term ones. It isn't about timing markets its about a steady hand that doesn't panic and makes sure you don't get caught with your pants down when you need cash.
- what_ever 1y ago
  Hard to know what OP asked for but if they asked for AI specifically, the advise does not need to be holistic.
aksss 1y ago
Are you bearish on the shovel seller? Is now the time to sell out? I'm still +40% on nvda - quite late to the game but people still seem to be buying the shovels.
- StopDisinfo910 1y ago
  I have absolutely no clue whatsoever. I have zero insider information. For all I know, the bubble could pop tomorrow or we might be at the beginning of a shift of a similar magnitude to the industrial revolution. If I could reliably tell, I wouldn’t tell you anyway. I would be getting rich. I’m just amused by people who think they are financially more clever by taking conservative positions. At that point, just buy ETF. That’s even more diversification that buying Microsoft.
- BrawnyBadger53 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

la64710 1y ago

Correction if I may: Lot of AI jobs will disappear. Lot of usual jobs that were put on hold will return. This is good news for most of humankind.