4 ms·

> However, at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, which has minted its fair share of tech entrepreneurs, Prof [...] says [..something innocuous about whet

by neilv 1y ago

> However, at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, which has minted its fair share of tech entrepreneurs, Prof [...] says [..something innocuous about whether there's an AI bubble...] If there were a bubble right now, would it be suicide for a professor at the Stanford business school to be quoted by a reporter saying that?

chii 1y ago
it wouldn't be suicide at all. There's no penalty for anyone calling out what might seem like a bubble. If it turns out to be an actual bubble, they can claim to be prophetic visionaries. If it turns out it's not a bubble, nobody bats an eye.
- neilv 1y ago
  No disfavor (on campus, nor with investors and other connections) for peeing on everyone's party?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - ptero 1y ago
    I bet that is correct. And not just for academics, it should be OK for an AWS employee to call AI investments a bubble or worse. As long as he clearly states that it is only his personal opinion.
doctoboggan 1y ago
He didn't make a statement about whether there is an AI bubble, he just said we wouldn't know if we were in one: > "It is very hard to time a bubble," Prof Admati told me. "And you can't say with certainty you were in one until after the bubble has burst." This statement is very true. Even if we are in a bubble you should not make the mistake of trying to time it properly. For example, look at Nvidia during the last cryptocurrency hype cycle. If you predicted that was a bubble and tried shorting their stock, you would have lost since it didn't drop at all at they successfully jumped from crypto to AI and continued their rise. I am not saying crypto wasn't a bubble, and I am not saying AI isn't a bubble; I am saying it would be a mistake to try to time it. Just VT and chill.
- neilv 1y ago
  He gave an innocuous response. Which prompted the question of whether there would be strong disincentive for any Stanford business school professor to give a non-innocuous response that would be a wet blanket on the AI ambitions surrounding them.
Ekaros 1y ago
Not if they are not only ones doing it. And at the current moment there is enough consensus that valuations are high. And even that they look bubbleish... In this sort of environment you can basically freely say as such. I think there would be lot more pushback if you said that this will go to 10x or 100x or 10000x in a few years... That might be suicide...

by neilv 1y ago

chii 1y ago

it wouldn't be suicide at all. There's no penalty for anyone calling out what might seem like a bubble. If it turns out to be an actual bubble, they can claim to be prophetic visionaries. If it turns out it's not a bubble, nobody bats an eye.

neilv 1y ago
No disfavor (on campus, nor with investors and other connections) for peeing on everyone's party?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- ptero 1y ago
  I bet that is correct. And not just for academics, it should be OK for an AWS employee to call AI investments a bubble or worse. As long as he clearly states that it is only his personal opinion.

doctoboggan 1y ago

He didn't make a statement about whether there is an AI bubble, he just said we wouldn't know if we were in one: > "It is very hard to time a bubble," Prof Admati told me. "And you can't say with certainty you were in one until after the bubble has burst." This statement is very true. Even if we are in a bubble you should not make the mistake of trying to time it properly. For example, look at Nvidia during the last cryptocurrency hype cycle. If you predicted that was a bubble and tried shorting their stock, you would have lost since it didn't drop at all at they successfully jumped from crypto to AI and continued their rise. I am not saying crypto wasn't a bubble, and I am not saying AI isn't a bubble; I am saying it would be a mistake to try to time it. Just VT and chill.

neilv 1y ago
He gave an innocuous response. Which prompted the question of whether there would be strong disincentive for any Stanford business school professor to give a non-innocuous response that would be a wet blanket on the AI ambitions surrounding them.

Ekaros 1y ago

Not if they are not only ones doing it. And at the current moment there is enough consensus that valuations are high. And even that they look bubbleish... In this sort of environment you can basically freely say as such. I think there would be lot more pushback if you said that this will go to 10x or 100x or 10000x in a few years... That might be suicide...