> and we'll be able to see if all the hype was warranted.

Umm, what? For the past 3 years, every year I've said something along the lines of "even if models stop improving now, we'll be working on this for years, finding new ways to use it and make cool stuff happen". The hype is already warranted. To have used these tools and not be hyped is simply denial at this point.

▲

p-o 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Maybe AI is useful to you, but the US economy is currently buoyed by promises of AI replacing the workforce across the board.

Most of Mag-7 are planning to spend over 500B on capex this year alone on building out datacenters for AI pipelines that have yet to prove that it can generate a sustainable profit. Yes, AI is useful in some environments, but the current pricing is heavily subsidized. So my point stand, the hype is not warranted.

	▲	athrowaway3z 4 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Leaving aside the economic shitshow and other things. I think you're right but for the wrong reasons wrt sustainable profit. Specifically, overcounting how much it will cost in 5 years to run AI because you're extrapolating current high prices, and at the same time undercounting how the demand will drive efficiency gains.
	▲	wiseowise 22 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> but the US economy is currently buoyed by promises of AI replacing the workforce across the board. Still don't understand what's the end goal here. Assuming they don't deliver, then there are billions of investments that will go bust. Assuming they deliver, millions lose their jobs and there's going to be a bloodbath on the streets.

▲

chasd00 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

i think the point is AI has to go much further and faster than it has in the past 3 years to justify the investments being made from the hype. The hype did its job now the AI industry has to execute and create the returns they promised. That is still very much up in the air, if they can't then the tech was over hyped.