all 36 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 6 days ago
[–] 33 points 1 week ago (10 children)

I haven't seen any productivity or growth from AI.

All I see is increased liabilities and failures.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 week ago* (6 children)

    I know I'm going to catch flak for it, but I definitely see use cases where LLMs (AI hasn't been invented yet) do increase productivity. All my devs use them for their daily work and haven't once questioned that it's useful. However, they know when to use LLMs and when not too. That is definitely not the case for the general populace and is further accentuated by big tech unnecessarily cramming that stuff in everything. That's what's creating an ecological and societal issue that's rightfully driving the negative sentiments

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    All my devs use them for their daily work and haven’t once questioned that it’s useful.

    Not questioned that it's useful or just told you what you want to hear? I would argue that it's the latter, being driven by fear of losing their jobs especially given the current state of the tech sector with the amount of layoffs of devs due to them being replaced by AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago

    Nothing I could tell you could prove we're not that kind of company without doxxing myself. I can just tell you that I'm usually the first person trying to dispel the illusion that LLMs can replace people. Wether people like it or not, it's a powerful and helpful tool in the right hands, that is changing day to day workflows. Wether people like it or not, it remains nothing more than a tool, that needs the right skills and settings, nothing revolutionary.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Apparently you don't follow the news about software vulnerabilities. Since LLMs started replacing coders the number has skyrocketed. I've also seen more consumers abstaining from online platforms than ever because they know, they don't think they know, that sloppers such as yourself will not hesitate to sell off their face and identity to Peter Theil the billionnaire nazi.

    AI doesn't have a use case aside from disinformation, it's a net negative on society by a lot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    An LLM is basically a glorified autocomplete. Ideal for writing standard code blocks and automating repetitive tasks. It's a bit like getting a trainee to bash out stuff that doesn't require much thought. Using it to write your entire codebase and calling it "vibe coding" is like getting a trainee to write your entire codebase.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Then you have either literally not even tried to look, or are objectively ignoring reality in favor of personal biases and possibly xenophobia.

    There's plenty of issues, water problems, power problems, ethical concerns, etc.

    But claiming there's been no productivity, growth or progress caused by LLM technology is objectively wrong.

    It's like claiming that nuclear research brought zero benefits just because you disagree with nukes.

    It's objectively on every level, retarded as fuck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    I agree with your point but “xenophobia”? Come on man, what are you smoking? Also loads of people just don’t have a day-to-day use case for LLM’s, doesn’t make them stupid/retarded for never seeing any upside and only see the downsides. Explaining what you use it for and its pros is a much better argument

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Or just skip this shit. We don't need "AI"

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 14 points 1 week ago

    Europe being “absent” from the AI safety debate may be the feature, not the bug. While Silicon Valley debates whether its own products could end humanity, Europe is asking the less cinematic question: why should our infrastructure, data and economy depend on a handful of US firms? Safety without sovereignty is just dependency with better paperwork.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago (7 children)

    Wdym abscent? The EU was among the first to regulate AI

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    And the EU has its own domestic AI, including Mistral which is one of the big ones. Not an AI fan myself but this is clearly nonsense

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    And even if they didn't AI is rapidly becoming a generic commodity. Just build a datacenter and plug in an off-the-shelf LLM. There's nothing to really catch up on other than infrastructure, which will be radically cheaper when the bubble pops. There is no crucial or indispensible IP for countries or even companies to own.

    Given the current inflated costs (and the energy crisis), the best thing to do is wait until this shakes out and build in the future with a clearer understanding of the destination.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    infrastructure, which will be radically cheaper when the bubble pops

    I wouldn't count on that unless the popping sound is nuclear. Demand for AI is not going anywhere, even when companies fail and investors lose out.

    What will improve prices for everyone is better algorithms and more efficient chips for them, helping supply to catch up with demand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    We must disagree on what a bubble is or whether AI is a bubble, because what you're saying seem nonsensical to me.

    Demand for AI will slowly grow, but the insane prices for components will come down because what is driving those prices is speculation about future growth, not actual current, near- or even medium-term demmand.

    Another thing to consider is that AI infrastructure is barely infrastructure at all--you have to buy new GPUs every 5-or-so years, at a tremendous cost. If you build a data center, they, in a sane world, those GPUS need to pay for themselves before the next batch of GPUs comes in.

    There really is no reason to go nuts building temporary infrastructure when the price is at its peak. Please, I'm begging you, start making sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Current demand for AI seems anything but slow.. do you think this hardware is being hoarded by large buyers, instead of being put to commercial use ASAP?

    Whether it takes 3 months or 5 years to pay for itself is a valid Q though, and there is an element of risk that these companies take on with large hardware purchases in a rapidly evolving industry. Ultimately profits will need to cover any debts they take on, and there's only so much private investment money to go around... I expect to see more consolidation as this plays out.

    Owning datacenters with secure energy sources seems like a safe bet though, and is probably the bigger initial investment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    Circular financing from NVIDIA is selling more cards than can be installed. The business press is absolutely supine on this, but it's likely there are qute a few purchased GPUs sitting in warehouses.

    https://infrathesis.substack.com/p/gpu-bought-cant-build-data-center-bottleneck

    Edit: "What do you mean people aren't finding a lot of gold? Don´t you see how many pans have been sold?!"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    The title doesn't make much sense so I haven't read the article. No, experimenting with LLMs/"AI" doesn't automatically make you "dependent on US/China tools". The same way as drawing cats doesn't make you a Egypt colony.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    Shun it and have a population of people who can solve their own problems. Use it and gain a population that give of even basic decision making skills.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    Or make your own

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

    Europe does not invest much into technology; Europeans in general don't like technology. Let the Europeans be good humanist progressives, and leave them alone. They are not in a rat race for dominance.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 days ago*

    Europe does not invest much into technology

    We invest shitloads, we invent shitloads. The problem is you don't hear about it because it's bought up by US tech companies to be announced as one of their new products. Ask Americans who invented many of the key milestone technologies and they'll reply with a list of Americans. They're then shocked when they found out that those Americans are actually only the ones who patented it first and that it was first invented in Europe.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Besides hardware manufacturers (nvidia et al) not a single company is growing because of AI.

  • source
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago

    Shun the technology and lose out on growth feel the JOMO (Joy of Missing Out).

    There, fixed it for you.

  • source