Remix.run Logo
gck1 a day ago

We see that market is very irrational now and it can stay irrational for long enough to destroy everything we know in tech.

By the time market figures things out, you may no longer have services, and hardware that you use daily. When such amounts of stupid money are pumped into a single industry, even if all AI companies went out of business tomorrow, it's going to take years for things to go back to normal.

FWIW, I'm not advocating taxes, as I think that won't really do anything. I don't know what the solution is either.

infecto a day ago | parent | next [-]

Sounds like hyperbole. Yes the world is connected yes we are seeing shortages, yes the market is imperfect and it lags but this is how things get fixed. Prices are sorted out, manufacturers make bets on long term capacity. Some will be losers, some will be winners.

embedding-shape a day ago | parent | next [-]

My guess is that many of the current people saying "technology is over and no one will afford their own computer" might have been born after the previous shortages, so it's in reality their first shortage and they have no memories (nor interest reading about) the previous ones, that all eventually washed over, even if at those points there were also people claiming that "No one will have their own SSD in the future, because prices will always be super expensive for consumers from now on".

That's my hypothesis I spent a whole of 30 seconds thinking about anyways.

gck1 a day ago | parent | next [-]

This is a different kind of shortage though. Previous ones were cyclical and caused by supply/demand mismatches or natural disasters. This one is structural. The manufacturers are actively choosing to prioritize AI because the margins are dramatically higher, and AI market has virtually unlimited money right now.

> eventually washed over

Eventually is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Several years of constrained supply have real consequences for people and businesses. Hardware manufacturers are saying most of their capacity is already sold out to AI customers through 2026, and possibly even through 2027 and 2028, with the rest of the markets getting what's left over. This is a fundamentally different market dynamic.

embedding-shape a day ago | parent [-]

> caused by supply/demand mismatches

How is that different from today? The scale might be different, but it's quite literally a "supply/demand mismatch" right now.

I don't think what we're seeing today can be described as "structural", at least because it's way too short to make such proclamations today, if it ossifies, then yeah maybe I'd agree with you, it's become structural.

> Several years of constrained supply have real consequences for people and businesses

Indeed, but lets see if it'll go as far as being "several years", the prices already stopped increasing, and supply still isn't planned to be expanded, if either of those changes you might have a point, but as of today it seems like an exaggeration.

Silhouette 19 hours ago | parent [-]

The "scale might be different" matters quite a lot in this case. We're not just talking about demand slightly outpacing supply and resulting in prices going up 10%. We're talking about large parts of our societies and economies no longer having reliable access to technology that we now depend on for normal operation.

We wouldn't allow any amount of investor money to buy out essential utilities and then exploit their natural monopolies to charge the public 10x as much for access to water or electricity.

We wouldn't allow any amount of investor money to buy out all the companies that maintain our roads or rail networks and then charge 10x the established prices for maintaining that infrastructure.

We wouldn't allow any amount of investor money to buy out all the phone networks and then deny people access to communication because they didn't pay some exorbitant protection fee.

No-one thinks regulation of these markets and interference with these kinds of corporate transactions is a crazy idea. Why do so many people here apparently think we should let the funny money funded AI giants distort the entire global tech supply chain in the hope that their silly valuations won't come crashing down for a bit longer?

We can't afford to wait "several years" to see whether the invisible hand will fix the problem. The markets have already allowed this situation to develop over a period of several years. The damage is too severe and it's happening right now and it's getting worse. Governments need to start swinging the regulatory axe now.

nottorp 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> it's in reality their first shortage

... or their first bubble.

gck1 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Market is fixing it. Memory makers prioritized HBM and enterprise NAND, some, like Crucial, went out of consumer business entirely.

At the same time, the rational market is behaving rationally - they're not increasing production because they're fearing AI bubble could burst, leaving them with oversupply and expensive factories.

The market, apart from AI market, is behaving exactly as it's designed and as it should. But it doesn't mean outcome is good for everyone.

infecto a day ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

Silhouette 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Why not? The point of regulation is to fix things when market forces haven't been sufficient. You keep talking about winners and losers but it's unclear to me who you think is actually winning in this situation.

infecto 17 hours ago | parent [-]

and what market forces haven’t been sufficient here. Demand went up, price has gone up. Price has been fairly stable since the initial run up. It’s unclear to me why you think who the winners or losers matters. My position is it’s incredibly difficult to regulate short term supply and demand. You will always introduce unintended consequence. Regulation in my opinion works best where there are external costs that are hard to measure. This is not one of them.

Silhouette 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Market forces have not been sufficient because the funny money moving around in the AI sector is starting to significantly damage other parts of the economy. I'm not sure how I can say this any more clearly.

If the AI sector wants to take a big risk that either pays off or it doesn't then that's one thing. If the danger is contained and the people taking the risks are the only ones who will suffer if things don't work out then that's their choice. The important point is that the danger in this case is not contained. It's not just the AI sector being affected now. It's not just the people choosing to take the risk in the hope of a big profit who are being harmed.

I don't think it's realistic any longer to treat this as some sort of short term supply-and-demand problem with luxury products. It's been building up for several years already. We're seeing public statements from some of the big companies involved that already run through 2026 and beyond that imply the supply chain situation continuing to worsen for everyone else. And the components in question are now necessary for a lot of normal operations and day-to-day life.

If we just wait and see for another 2-3 years as some are suggesting then in the meantime real businesses who were operating responsibly and doing nothing wrong will be failing to grow as they should, putting up prices for their customers, letting staff go, or even failing completely. Governments will be redirecting tax revenues to basic IT infrastructure instead of public services. People who just wanted to buy a normal device for their own personal use won't be able to afford one or maybe to find one at all and their quality of life will fall.

I can see no reason why we should allow these harmful outcomes just because some already rich VCs and some AI tech bros are playing games at the scale of the global economy to try to sustain the unrealistic valuations of the big tech companies for their own benefit. It's increasingly unlikely to work anyway and it's a realistic possibility that the bubble will burst this year so trying to contain the fallout from that as much as possible instead of allowing the bubble to inflate even further is not a bad idea either.

rlpb a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> ...and it can stay irrational for long enough to destroy everything we know in tech.

Nah. For decades software engineers have been more expensive than the cost of buying the extra hardware needed for vastly inefficient software. There are orders of magnitude of inefficiency there. So there's a ton of slack in the world's software that can be taken up by software engineers while hardware is scarce, pushing back the date where there will really be a problem probably by decades more.

Of course software engineers will see a problem though, because they'll have to learn to to write efficient software again.

ie. "Great, but now make it work with less RAM" will be a thing again, instead of "It needs more RAM so order some as it's cheaper than your time to fix the code".

embedding-shape a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> it can stay irrational for long enough to destroy everything we know in tech

What does this even mean? I know people on the internet sometimes exaggerate, but I cannot even begin to find a more charitable meaning with this, what exactly will be "destroyed" in "tech" because of prices going up for a year or two?

gck1 a day ago | parent [-]

Here's an easy experiment to conduct: look around the room at your home and count all the devices that have a CPU, RAM, SSD or HDD.

Then take a look at your bank statement to see what are the services you pay for monthly that also require the same hardware.

Now, imagine that these devices or services can no longer procure RAM, SSD or HDD. There's no more available supply for these components, because this is what's happening.

Would you still be able to have these devices if they all broke tomorrow? What about your hypothetical Backblaze subscription? Would you still be able to have an off-site backup?

iso1631 a day ago | parent | next [-]

My laptop's 8 years old, if I can't get memory I'll just have to sweat it a little longer. Same with my NAS drive

Same with work -- I've just ordered some replacements for 13 year old servers in one office, but if it was more economical to repair them

embedding-shape a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> imagine that these devices or services can no longer procure RAM, SSD or HDD

Why would I imagine something so far out from what will realistically happen?

Again, a lot of doom and gloom over very unrealistic scenarios. Where are you even getting this from, YouTube channels?

Of course if there is no RAM or flash-storage at all available, eventually hardware will be unfeasible. But when we've experienced these sort of things before, it eventually restores to "normal" prices, and there absolutely nothing pointing to what we're experiencing now to get even worse, if anything it's already stabilized.

ErneX a day ago | parent | next [-]

Valve had to delay a bunch of new products already. They also had to effectively discontinue the non-OLED Steam Deck due to the increased prices.

https://www.theverge.com/games/874196/valve-steam-machine-fr...

embedding-shape a day ago | parent [-]

Yeah, which shows that Valve don't think "these devices or services can no longer procure RAM, SSD or HDD" is actually what'll happen in reality, because then they'd have to cancel the hardware fully. Instead, they're delaying it.

ErneX 21 hours ago | parent [-]

With a likely price increase.

Regarding OP, I don’t think they implied this will last forever, but is definitely concerning.

embedding-shape 20 hours ago | parent [-]

I jumped into the discussion because of this hyperbole:

> to destroy everything we know in tech

Valve (temporarily) increasing the pricing of yet-to-launch hardware wasn't where I thought we'd land at with my first comment, I somehow also have the feeling that that wasn't what GP had in mind either,.

iso1631 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You don't have to look too far back in history -- look at the supply squeeze during covid, or even just during the Suez closure by the Evergiven.

infecto a day ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

wiredpancake 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

Silhouette a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What we're seeing is the natural conclusion of VC distortion in a market. There is so much money being pumped into AI speculatively now that it's hurting normal and sustainable businesses in other parts of the economy.

The solution might have to be mandatory rationing of some kind to avoid a situation where only a handful of AI giants are able to buy essential components. We can't just throw the rest of the economy under a bus to support the AI bubble for a few more months.

I'm working with a business right now that would like to buy some new servers for sensible, boring business reasons. It is having trouble because the prices from their normal suppliers are now extremely high - if the components are even available at all. This business has nothing to do with AI or Big Tech and yet it's at risk of being unable to continue normal operations in much the same way that a business would be affected if the phone networks were all switched off or the water supply to its office was cut. We regulate those industries because their continued reasonable operation is essential to make sure everyone else can continue to operate reasonably as well.

gck1 a day ago | parent | next [-]

I'm seeing the same thing. I was consulting a group of people in my city that wanted to digitize massive load of old VHS tapes. No AI, no crazy tech, just standard, boring storage+network infrastructure.

I'm looking at the procurement sheet that I made for them a year ago. Half of the items are no longer available, while the other half became so expensive that we'd probably build 10 of such labs with these costs a year ago.

I'm also looking at my home NAS right now - I pray not even a plastic clip breaks inside, because I'd have to shut it down.

While these are still likely the first things that you'd think of being affected, I'm sure the effects are rippling through essentially every industry that utilizes these components in their supply chain. Which is probably - every industry nowadays?

infecto a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think that’s a massive stretch. What we are seeing is a new frontier in tech that nobody knows where it will land yet. Hyperscalers see a future where if they don’t build now that they might be left behind.

Absolutely VC money is flowing around but I think it’s unclear where the cards fall yet.

Not sure what you would regulate here. I hate the tripe that America and China are at war but I do think it’s not a great decision to stop the current work the west is doing as China is pushing full steam ahead.

Silhouette 20 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not much of a stretch at all. There are already normal businesses that can't buy normal equipment at normal prices (or can't buy it at all) right now because the supply chain has been redirected to a small number of businesses that can only afford to drain the pipeline like that because of the astronomical scale of speculative investment they've received. Similarly there already individuals who can't buy normal equipment for their own use.

This situation is harmful both economically and for basic quality of life. It is rational - and probably now necessary - for governments to intervene to counter the market distortion and ensure the continued availability of normal products to everyone else.

I am fully aware that the West regulating here would potentially undermine the VC investment model that these big tech firms are relying on. I have no problem with this. Business entities are legal fictions that we allow to exist for the benefit of real people. If the behaviour of those entities is harmful to real people - and I don't think anyone can credibly claim otherwise in this case - then it's time to change the rules they operate under.

Imustaskforhelp a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I wish this comment can be on the absolute top of this page. This really is one of my frustrations with the AI bubble.

Fwiw, the days of creating an good ol' reliable hosting provider/Vps provider are over. I looked extensively into it one time out of curiosity but this would be one of the worst times in history to do that.

We would be sort of stuck with the options that we have right now and more and more shops in Lowend are even shutting down or raising prices with the sheer ram crisis and even HDD and storage crisis now.

A provider in LET had a post which said, "what should we providers do to deal with the ram shortage/ram prices"

These providers gave competition/had different unique features too to have chosen them but they were also incredibly price sensitive and the AI bubble blew the sensitivity by raising the prices almost 5 times or more. This would impact real businesses.

Thank you for creating this comment. I hope more people can read this. I genuinely just want this bubble to burst asap so that we can see a sense of rationality back within the market/the market functioning as expected without the immense irrationality/unpredictability of future.

another point is this, from my hosting provider idea, I shut it down. Why? because it literally makes 0 sense to start now, its postponed indefinitely untill the bubble bursts/ram prices are decreased.

How many other projects might be going through something similar. Gck1's comment next to mine also gives an example of a project whose value of cost increased 10 times.

How many of such projects would simply be unable to be built because of the ram inflation can't be underestimated imo.

and forget people who wish to game and many other things too. Basic comodities in the previous year or two feel like luxury now. All because of AI. It's insane.

mr_toad a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> We see that market is very irrational now and it can stay irrational

That meme refers to speculation on stock market prices. Nobody is buying up RAM with the expectation of making speculative gains on it.