This is true if you take the ai market as equal to the market for labor discounted to 5-10% penetration.

It’s not a totally unreasonable assertion, it’s the implication of the assertion that we are uncomfortable with. There is no reason for the models to stop their improvements in the near future.

▲

ben_w 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> There is no reason for the models to stop their improvements in the near future.

Sure there is.

1. The cost of each new generation of training runs appears to be rapidly rising

2. The Trump admin just told the leading model to stop making it available to non-Americans, which in practice meant stop providing it at all

3. The factories to make the hardware are hitting bottlenecks, and while they've currently been navigated around, there's never a guarantee the next one will be

Currently I'm wondering at what point the direct impact on the US energy supply gives the US a taste of Baumol's cost disease as AI companies continue to outbid everyone else for electricity.

▲

pixl97 4 hours ago | parent [-]

There are some counters to this, especially in electricity. We'll see massive expansions of wind and solar in the US because of this. Both the speed of install and low costs will guarantee it.

	▲	ben_w 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> We'll see massive expansions of wind and solar in the US because of this. Both the speed of install and low costs will guarantee it. Implausible while Trump remains in office. He hates renewables, shuts them down even when doing so actively costs money. Between AI hallucinated content and the politicisation of the numbers, I'm not sure how much AI compute capacity is being planned right now; would you accept a claim of 300 GW? It's a number I heard recently. Given the capacity factor of PV, even China would have to think carefully before supplying that much PV over the next few years (300 GW avg ~= 3TW nameplate). (Not sure about wind, wind's CF seems to vary between years).

▲

sph 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> There is no reason for the models to stop their improvements in the near future.

You speak as if "improvements to models" is just function of time, and resources are infinite.

Models keep improving as long as there are resources to allow for larger and larger datacenters, if we hit a scientific breakthrough once LLM technology become the bottleneck, if the economy is infinite to allow infinite growth, and (geo)politics is not a thing to worry about. Or we discover ASI, machine improve themselves and we reach the technological singularity.

I know everybody is drinking the kool aid by the gallon, but can we maintain a little bit of objectivity?

	▲	AceJohnny2 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		yeah, it's funny how so many think the beginning of the S-curve is an exponential. Granted, we don't know when the S-curve will inflect, but predicting too great an outcome is just as silly as discounting it altogether.