the goal of the major AI labs is to create AGI. The net utility of AGI is at least on the level of electricity, or the steam engine. It's debatable whether or not they'll achieve that, but if you actually look at what the goal is, the investment makes sense.

▲

Fomite 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

'It's debatable whether or not they'll achieve that, but if you actually look at what the goal is, the investment makes sense.'

The first clause of that sentence negates the second.

The investment only makes sense if the the expectation of success * the investment < the payoff of that goal.

If I don't think the major AI labs will succeed, then it's not justified.

▲

danlitt 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AGI is not even a well-defined goal, let alone one that can be reasonably expected from the current tranche of investment. By your logic, any investment makes sense - this is not investment at all, it is a gambling addiction.

▲

jcgrillo 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

what? crashing the economy for a psychotic sci-fi delusion "makes sense"? how?

▲

rockemsockem 7 days ago | parent [-]

How exactly is AI crashing the economy....? Do you walk around with these beliefs every day?

▲

jcgrillo 7 days ago | parent [-]

when bubbles burst crashes follow. this is a colossal bubble. i do walk around with that belief every day, because every day that passes is yet another day when this overblown AI hype bullshit fails to deliver the goods.

▲

rockemsockem 6 days ago | parent [-]

So you think the entire perceived value of AI will be wiped out.

I think we probably are in a bubble, but much like housing bubbles in major metro areas, the value is real and so the bubble is on top of that real value vs being 100% synthetic.

▲

jcgrillo 5 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, because big market crashes don't just impact the previously inflated sectors. They hurt all the sectors. So the wipeout could easily exceed the current perceived value of AI.

	▲	rockemsockem 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Okay that at least makes sense to me. IMO it's also clearly wrong, because I think even if you believe most of AI is hype you must see the value that a lot of people are getting from it, like the housing market example I gave. Appreciate you explaining your perspective!