4 ms·

Pets.com→Chewy Webvan → Instacart, DoorDash, Amazon Fresh Kozmo.com → Postmates, Uber Eats, Gopuff Boo.com (fashion) → Farfetch, Net-a-Porter, ASOS Broadcas

by hnburnsy 11mo ago

Pets.com→Chewy Webvan → Instacart, DoorDash, Amazon Fresh Kozmo.com → Postmates, Uber Eats, Gopuff Boo.com (fashion) → Farfetch, Net-a-Porter, ASOS Broadcast.com → YouTube, Netflix, Twitch The dot-com bubble didn’t prove the internet was a fad — it proved the internet was inevitable, but the valuations assumed adoption would happen in 2 years instead of 15–20. To me it feels like the AI inevitability will be much quicker.

bluefirebrand 11mo ago
> To me it feels like the AI inevitability will be much quicker. AI is accelerating "let them eat cake" at rates never seen before in history, so I imagine the violence will follow soon after
- dudeinjapan 11mo ago
  Yeah but AI can also generate a picture of any cake you prompt it.
softwaredoug 11mo ago
On the RHS, post hype, the second movers could work on the boring, unsexy problems in those domains nobody wanted to solve. And solve them extremely well. Then build a moat around that. There is also a customer adoption curve of technology that lags far behind the technologist adoption curve. For example video on the Web failed a long time, until it didn't, when Youtube began to succeed. The problem became "boring" to technologists in some ways, but consumers gradually caught up.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
ruszki 11mo ago
If technology had been the same for the past 20 years, basically none of these would have existed, or would be even close as large as today. We needed way faster cable and mobile internet, and smartphones. Probably even smaller laptops. It was possible to predict these more or less, however, it was impossible to predict when or whether people start to really utilize the internet. Even now, we needed COVID to have another shift regarding this. The general acceptance of “internet first” kind of worldview maybe would have never happened without forcing us to have.
conqrr 11mo ago
Technology for all the above existed in rudimentary form, faster Internet, faster machines and adoption was missing. But Current bets are assuming AGI. No one knows how soon. To predict that would be foolish.
roxolotl 11mo ago
Aside from a belief that the AI adoption will happen very quickly, which maybe that’s your main point, you’re not really disagreeing with the article: > All this means two things to us: 1)The AI revolution will indeed be one of the biggest technology shifts in history. It will spark a generation of innovations that we can’t yet even imagine. 2) It’s going to take way longer to see those changes than we think it’s going to take right now.
themafia 11mo ago
> To me it feels like the AI inevitability will be much quicker. Based on what? We're only seeing linear improvements for increasing spending. There's no new algorithm ideas on the horizon, just more and more hardware, in the hopes that if we throw enough RAM and CPU at the problem, it will suddenly become "AGI." No one has their eye on power budgets or sustainability or durability of the system. The human brain has such a high degree of energy efficiency that I don't think people understand the realities of competing with it digitally. The main problem "AI" seems to solve is that humans get bored with certain tasks. The language models obviously don't, but they do hallucinate, and checking for hallucinations is an exceedingly boring task. It's a coffin corner of bad ideas.
- rdsubhas 11mo ago
  > Based on what? Internet did not have enough devices to reach people. At the height of 2002 only a fraction of people worldwide had an already expensive computer and an internet to go with it. I ran a e-commerce startup from 2005-2010. Having access to demand is a thing. Today everyone has access in their pockets. Go to small city in Africa, India and China, and observe how they use AI. See how perplexity has put AI answers in hundreds of millions of people's hands before Google in a matter of months. Forgive me for saying — but "Based on what" for comparing accelerated adoption between 2005 and 2025 — is discarding many huge elephants in the room, starting with that small thing you're reading this in your hand with, and the invisible thing that's sending you this comment.
- tim333 11mo ago
  >no new algorithm ideas on the horizon The LLM algorithms seem pretty clunky to me, like a hack designed for text translation that surprised everyone by getting quite smart. The reason the human brain is so much more energy efficient is quite likely better design/algorithms. I was watching some video comparing brain and LLM function and almost tempted to try building something myself (https://youtu.be/3SUqBUGlyh8 https://youtu.be/3SUqBUGlyh8). I'm sure there are many more competent people looking at similar things.
  - fatata123 11mo ago
wayeq 11mo ago
Blockchain --> ?
- tim333 11mo ago
  Blockchain the the internet seem to have stabilized. The internet as fast video capable links between computers, blockchain as a tech for speculation, gambling and some criminal stuff. AI has not and is still on the exponential bit of the S curve.
1vuio0pswjnm7 11mo ago
"The dot-com bubble didn't prove the internet was a fad -" The internet is a medium, an interconnection of autonomous computer networks A "web" of hyperlinked HTML pages is one use of an internet However this internet is more than a handful of popular websites incorporated as companies Perhaps that's why it was called the "dot-com" bubble and not the "internet" bubble
- tim333 11mo ago
  The internet predated dot-coms by two or three decades and wasn't very bubbly - mostly government funded links between academic and military institutions. It was only when commerce got in there in the 90s that things started getting busy and then bubbly.
thefz 11mo ago
Inevitability of what, chatbots that mark poisonous mushrooms as edible in every product?
- laterium 11mo ago
  How does this add to the discussion? Is the goal to make HN as toxic as everywhere else online? If you have something to say, say it. Otherwise this performative negativity and cynicism is boring honestly.
  - dontlaugh 11mo ago
    How is it toxic to back against the irrational infatuation with barely useful stochastic parrots?
  - thefz 11mo ago
    What I have to say is in the comment above: chatbots are mediocre at best
nitwit005 11mo ago
A lot of those early .com companies could have been profitable. They chose to go for rapid growth instead. Some people here probably remember discussion of users mattering more than revenue. You see that same pattern with AI now. Products are being provided for free or nearly free, and plenty is being spent on marketing.
- AbstractH24 11mo ago
  Thats because both then and now there’s a perception that it’s a land grab. That the key to success is developing a brand and user base faster than the next person can. And that’s where AI makes things so hard. Creating a protective moat.
  - soorya3 11mo ago
    also people forget that user base can change, yahoo -> gmail, altavista -> google search etc
    - AbstractH24 11mo ago
      A lot of companies are shocked to find user loyalty is about as good as employer The minute Amazon stops being good about refunds or a cheaper delivery app comes out than DoorDash I’m gone. No loyalty. And both of those are on the verge as they focus on profits over customer experience.
AbstractH24 11mo ago
Most people would agree with this, question is just how much faster.

bluefirebrand 11mo ago

> To me it feels like the AI inevitability will be much quicker. AI is accelerating "let them eat cake" at rates never seen before in history, so I imagine the violence will follow soon after

dudeinjapan 11mo ago
Yeah but AI can also generate a picture of any cake you prompt it.

softwaredoug 11mo ago

On the RHS, post hype, the second movers could work on the boring, unsexy problems in those domains nobody wanted to solve. And solve them extremely well. Then build a moat around that. There is also a customer adoption curve of technology that lags far behind the technologist adoption curve. For example video on the Web failed a long time, until it didn't, when Youtube began to succeed. The problem became "boring" to technologists in some ways, but consumers gradually caught up.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

ruszki 11mo ago

If technology had been the same for the past 20 years, basically none of these would have existed, or would be even close as large as today. We needed way faster cable and mobile internet, and smartphones. Probably even smaller laptops. It was possible to predict these more or less, however, it was impossible to predict when or whether people start to really utilize the internet. Even now, we needed COVID to have another shift regarding this. The general acceptance of “internet first” kind of worldview maybe would have never happened without forcing us to have.

conqrr 11mo ago

Technology for all the above existed in rudimentary form, faster Internet, faster machines and adoption was missing. But Current bets are assuming AGI. No one knows how soon. To predict that would be foolish.

roxolotl 11mo ago

Aside from a belief that the AI adoption will happen very quickly, which maybe that’s your main point, you’re not really disagreeing with the article: > All this means two things to us: 1)The AI revolution will indeed be one of the biggest technology shifts in history. It will spark a generation of innovations that we can’t yet even imagine. 2) It’s going to take way longer to see those changes than we think it’s going to take right now.

themafia 11mo ago

> To me it feels like the AI inevitability will be much quicker. Based on what? We're only seeing linear improvements for increasing spending. There's no new algorithm ideas on the horizon, just more and more hardware, in the hopes that if we throw enough RAM and CPU at the problem, it will suddenly become "AGI." No one has their eye on power budgets or sustainability or durability of the system. The human brain has such a high degree of energy efficiency that I don't think people understand the realities of competing with it digitally. The main problem "AI" seems to solve is that humans get bored with certain tasks. The language models obviously don't, but they do hallucinate, and checking for hallucinations is an exceedingly boring task. It's a coffin corner of bad ideas.

rdsubhas 11mo ago
> Based on what? Internet did not have enough devices to reach people. At the height of 2002 only a fraction of people worldwide had an already expensive computer and an internet to go with it. I ran a e-commerce startup from 2005-2010. Having access to demand is a thing. Today everyone has access in their pockets. Go to small city in Africa, India and China, and observe how they use AI. See how perplexity has put AI answers in hundreds of millions of people's hands before Google in a matter of months. Forgive me for saying — but "Based on what" for comparing accelerated adoption between 2005 and 2025 — is discarding many huge elephants in the room, starting with that small thing you're reading this in your hand with, and the invisible thing that's sending you this comment.
tim333 11mo ago
>no new algorithm ideas on the horizon The LLM algorithms seem pretty clunky to me, like a hack designed for text translation that surprised everyone by getting quite smart. The reason the human brain is so much more energy efficient is quite likely better design/algorithms. I was watching some video comparing brain and LLM function and almost tempted to try building something myself (https://youtu.be/3SUqBUGlyh8 https://youtu.be/3SUqBUGlyh8). I'm sure there are many more competent people looking at similar things.
- fatata123 11mo ago

wayeq 11mo ago

Blockchain --> ?

tim333 11mo ago
Blockchain the the internet seem to have stabilized. The internet as fast video capable links between computers, blockchain as a tech for speculation, gambling and some criminal stuff. AI has not and is still on the exponential bit of the S curve.

1vuio0pswjnm7 11mo ago

"The dot-com bubble didn't prove the internet was a fad -" The internet is a medium, an interconnection of autonomous computer networks A "web" of hyperlinked HTML pages is one use of an internet However this internet is more than a handful of popular websites incorporated as companies Perhaps that's why it was called the "dot-com" bubble and not the "internet" bubble

tim333 11mo ago
The internet predated dot-coms by two or three decades and wasn't very bubbly - mostly government funded links between academic and military institutions. It was only when commerce got in there in the 90s that things started getting busy and then bubbly.

thefz 11mo ago

Inevitability of what, chatbots that mark poisonous mushrooms as edible in every product?

laterium 11mo ago
How does this add to the discussion? Is the goal to make HN as toxic as everywhere else online? If you have something to say, say it. Otherwise this performative negativity and cynicism is boring honestly.
- dontlaugh 11mo ago
  How is it toxic to back against the irrational infatuation with barely useful stochastic parrots?
- thefz 11mo ago
  What I have to say is in the comment above: chatbots are mediocre at best

nitwit005 11mo ago

A lot of those early .com companies could have been profitable. They chose to go for rapid growth instead. Some people here probably remember discussion of users mattering more than revenue. You see that same pattern with AI now. Products are being provided for free or nearly free, and plenty is being spent on marketing.

AbstractH24 11mo ago
Thats because both then and now there’s a perception that it’s a land grab. That the key to success is developing a brand and user base faster than the next person can. And that’s where AI makes things so hard. Creating a protective moat.
- soorya3 11mo ago
  also people forget that user base can change, yahoo -> gmail, altavista -> google search etc
  - AbstractH24 11mo ago
    A lot of companies are shocked to find user loyalty is about as good as employer The minute Amazon stops being good about refunds or a cheaper delivery app comes out than DoorDash I’m gone. No loyalty. And both of those are on the verge as they focus on profits over customer experience.

AbstractH24 11mo ago

Most people would agree with this, question is just how much faster.