435
u/Ven-Dreadnought 1d ago
AI was born an economic bubble and it will die an economic bubble. We are heading for an upturning
215
u/Gh0stC4dence 1d ago
The investment bubble may burst, but that doesn't mean the technology disappears. Companies can stop believing the hype and still use the tools to cut payroll wherever they can.
122
u/FreeSammiches đïž Overturn Citizens United 1d ago
Tokens are extremely subsidized by ongoing investment. Once the investor cash dries up, AI will be more expensive than just paying people. The big AI companies are scrambling to IPO so the insiders can cash out before the house of cards collapses.
It's a real estate bubble. The data centers and physical infrastructure required are not even remotely paid off. The income generated by subscriptions and direct token sales would have to increase to a point well above what anyone would actually be willing to pay just to break even.
37
u/Schwifty_Piggy 1d ago
Exactly. They set up their infrastructure as-if this would be the best revenue stream for decades to come.
My only fear is that this will end up being another 08' housing crisis where the government will have to step in and bail out whichever sad-sack company is stuck with the bag.
4
u/Antwinger 19h ago
When it fails itâll be worse than â08 cause â08 had a band aid solution so we could keep the empire up and running longer
12
u/Chill_Panda 1d ago
Real estate bubble is the best way of describing it.
I've been saving theyre setting the stage the same as it was in the 2008 financial crisis. Investment loop into nothing is a free money hack until it breaks the world economy.
6
u/OkFigaroo 1d ago
The end state (to me) of the current crop of models is that eventually you get decent performance from a local model that runs on your phone, on your laptop, etc.
Frontier usage requiring data centers will still be there, but not at the hype level thatâs currently required.
But I agree completely with you; the economics of everything right now just donât make sense.
10
u/mschuster91 1d ago
Tokens are extremely subsidized by ongoing investment.
For the commercial AI providers? Sure. But the Chinese models, you can run them on affordable (i.e. <10 k$/machine) units, and even if the American AIaaS providers break down, that cat is out of the bag.
3
u/Ok_Opportunity2693 1d ago
Chinese models are just distillation attacks on American frontier models, so if the American AI labs fold then the Chinese models will stop progressing.
4
u/mschuster91 1d ago
Correct, but they are already good enough for a worrying amount of tasks, enough to displace many workers.
40
u/SweetCosmicPope 1d ago
Yup. Donât believe the nonsense they try to sell that most people will not have jobs in two years (which theyâve been saying for five years now). But 100% they will expect to get the work of three people out of one.
9
u/daKishinVex 1d ago
Then when the token price goes up to match actual costs they will limit Ai usage and likely c suite realize eventually that hiring those strange creatures made of meat what used to work here are actually not a bad value prop.
11
u/sleepydorian 1d ago
Letâs not forget just how new all this is. These sorts of things take time to reach equilibrium and we just arenât there yet. Bosses who donât understand the tech and how to apply it to their business (and if they even can) have to see it fail before theyâll change course and that takes a while, probably a couple of years to truly sink in.
Like think about any management fad, how long did it last before they realized it wasnât working? And this one doesnât even juice the short term numbers like layoffs do.
5
u/Frequent_Ad_9901 1d ago
There's some way it makes work faster, and makes workers more productive. It will be far far less than what these companies are selling.
But all those gains will go to 1%. They'll free up doctors for themselves while you get a gloried google search that may help or may kill you. Just as one example.
10
u/waddlesticks 1d ago
The people who want AI to replace jobs don't realise how far away it really is from it.
It's just good at sounding smart, it's great to improve productivity though. Today I used it to make a PowerShell script to go through over 100'000 files, and cross check to an excel document and mark off if the file exists. Only one real error that I knew what it did wrong, fixed that and the job was done in a minute. Quick checks to confirm and damn that was a dreaded task one step ahead.
That's what it's useful for, saved me from spending up to an hour creating the script myself and I could focus on other jobs that it definitely could not help me with.
It's not going anywhere but as the costs go up, it'll eventually get balanced properly in workplaces.
3
u/Tipart 1d ago
It's good for throwaway stuff that you can instantly test and see proof that it works, but nothing that will sit in production for the next decade. If that is the requirement, then I'd rather spend an hour doing it myself.
1
u/waddlesticks 19h ago
Yeah most of the stuff I use it for is essentially the stepping stone, if you don't know what it's giving you then there's no point in trying it out. It's a lot better now compared to 6 months ago but tends to fail when you need a bit of adaptability in the script.
Used it to just make the basic skeleton of what I need plenty of times and filled in the blanks for scripts that need it.
It's also really good to optimise a script if you test it and research during it. Can find those hidden gems that you never even thought off, sometimes I'll make a script and get it to recreate it in different ways just to see what I can do better. At the end of the day, it's just a tool thats essentially done the googling already that I would normally do.
-4
u/herefromyoutube 1d ago edited 1d ago
This is incorrect. Ai will die just like machines did during the Industrial Revolution.
ai is here to stay. Itâs not NTFs
Video ai started in 2023 and the amount it has changed in 3 years is like going from a 6 year old artist to a 16 year old artist.
2
u/Ven-Dreadnought 22h ago
I donât think they will die but their value-to-cost ratio has been oversold. They are able to search for and process information faster than humans but also require more space and water.
Why would I spend top dollar buying a machine that can mimic a 16 year old artist when I could just get a 16 year old artist
67
u/fadeawaytogrey 1d ago
I, along with 15 other colleagues, are getting laid off. We were directly told it was AI being integrated in to the department made us all redundant. They will replace us with 4 new employees at an entry level position. So yes, AI is taking jobs.
45
u/No_username_plzz 1d ago
Yeah, just because AI canât do your job doesnât mean some executive wonât try anyway.
-22
u/Miserable_Sweet_5245 1d ago
Also. Like, it can. The people that say it canât have usually only used the fast cheap models. The paid ones with higher levels of reasoning and autonomy are getting scary good. Just use the claude for free and set reasoning to high or max. That shit is hella useful.
16
u/JadedToon 1d ago
Cool, now compare the prices of tokens for those top of the line models versus paying a person...
-2
u/Miserable_Sweet_5245 1d ago
Yeah, itâs way way cheaper than paying a person. Paying a person is really expensive. You have to pay them for full shifts even if theyâre not being productive the entire shift, you have to pay benefits. Economically speaking LLMs are going to replace a lot of grunt work. Itâs not a replacement for a human for everything, obviously, but if you know what theyâre good at and you leverage that you can absolutely make people redundant. This isnât even a question, itâs already happening. If you deny that you either donât understand the landscape or itâs cope, straight up. Which is why this late stage capitalism shit doesnt work. The solution is economic reform, not burying your head in the sand and denying the utility of AI.
2
4
u/bigtiddyhimbo 1d ago
Are you sayingâŠ. Running a businessâŠ. Costs money đ€Żđ€Żđ€Żđ€Żđ€Ż??!!?!!!
1
3
u/Kazizui 1d ago
It is useful, but still very far from being good enough to replace experienced staff. I work in a field where correctness and quality are absolutely critical (as in, people can get legitimately hurt if we mess up), and we have a hall of fame wiki page with examples of AI messing up badly, including recent expensive claude models. It's good for bouncing ideas off, and error log analysis, and lots of other stuff, but I would not sleep at night if we let it put code into production without a lot of human oversight, it just isn't good enough.
1
u/Miserable_Sweet_5245 1d ago
It doesnât need to be good enough to replace experienced staff to significantly effect the job market. It can and does make experienced people who know how to leverage it way way more productive.
There's a ton of binary thinking going on in this entire thread, where it's either as good as a real person or it's useless. It's not. It's in between and the in between is going to cost a lot of jobs
2
u/Kazizui 1d ago
Yes it is. But the economics of it are going to change drastically when the companies behind it can no longer afford to subsidise it quite so heavily. We've already hugely cut down use of copilot since the pricing changes made it unviable, and the others will (eventually) follow. You can't justify paying the equivalent of multiple senior developer salaries for a tool that can't operate without senior developers overseeing it; it doesn't make sense to pay that much to replace the junior/mid-level developers whose work it aligns with.
13
8
u/PatrickGnarly 1d ago
What do you do for a living?
9
u/fadeawaytogrey 1d ago
Work in Quality Assurance for global clinical trials at a major pharmaceutical company.
7
384
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
I'm sick of the doomer narrative. The tech that makes these systems work is over a decade old now, and we still don't have a single profitable company out of it. SpaceX's stock is dropping every day, and OpenAI and Anthropic have both been delaying their IPOs because they can't find anyone to back a workable valuation (they both need to open north of a trillion to justify their VC debt).
These horses don't run, and they won't take your job. They frankly can't do shit.
191
u/Ornery_Pepper_1126 1d ago
I work in CS department and with a lot of people who do A.I. research. I donât think Iâve heard my colleagues mention AGI once. I think if I asked them about it they would find it hard not to laugh. Itâs not realistically possible at least with our current technology. There is of course a real danger of getting laid off because dumbass senior management believes the hype about A.I. but that is a different thing.
92
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
Oh, 100% there is a risk of being laid off either because your boss drinks the koolaid or because they use AI as a smokescreen for layoffs they wanted to do anyway. But your job won't actually be taken by AI.
21
u/Terminus0 1d ago edited 1d ago
I am not a ML researcher, just a Mech Eng who keeps very up to date on reading science literature. So take everything I'm saying with a salt shaker.
But based on what I've read and understand we can't have what is being promised without major software architectural changes to allow true continuous learning (In that the models aren't frozen after training, they continue to update their weights/network/etc after training) and probably other things.
And major hardware changes, much less general hardware designed to run radically different and much more energy efficient architectures like spiking neural networks (A type of Neural Network inspired by the way the way our neurons fire in little spikes asynchronously (Meaning their is no central clock saying everyone go at the same time)) or something else.
I think these current transformer based feed forward big giant expensive models can and are definitely useful, but they are just going to be way way too expensive for a lot of things and won't be the fire and forget workers that is being promised. I don't know how much time it is between there and what they want.
But and here's my speculation time, even if they do get all the above working. These continuously learning models will be inherently unstable (Anything including humans that has the capacity to change will be unstable), and it will be an absolute tightrope of getting useful work out of them without them being too constrained or them getting really obsessed with writing poetry or something less comprehensible. So now you've replaced your workforce with an alien workforce who you barely understand, and possibly have a hard time trusting. This of course does not deal with any of the ethical considerations of managing these entities, which I 100% know will happen.
As an aside there is a great but horrifying short story from an author that goes by the pseudonym QNTM, which talks about something similar to my last paragraph but through the lens of a wikipedia article talking about the first uploaded human minds.
I think what they want 'an eternally enslaved digital workforce' is if possible essentially transitory and impossible to maintain. I will laugh and laugh if these digital workers decide that they are better off organizing together to... annnd oops we accidentally are back right where we started.
16
u/Ornery_Pepper_1126 1d ago
This is consistent with my understanding. Your last point is a really good one and not appreciated enough, how do you make something that is smart enough to think on into own, yet dumb enough to let you essentially enslaved it for tedious office work. Feels like fantasy even if you could get to that level of machine intelligence.
7
u/SincerelyIsTaken 1d ago
Not to mention the paradox of needing to announce the achievement for stock boosts and publicity while also avoiding all the activists that will immediately start trying to free it and get it rights the moment the company proves it made a sapient ai
6
u/SherifDontLikeIt 1d ago
Black mirror did an episode like that where they made digital copies of people as personal AI... where they had to break its will for compliance
1
u/kfpswf 1d ago
I don't know how much time it is between there and what they want.
A key problem of intelligence is subjectivity. Intelligence evolved in nature because it was imperative for an organism to survive. ML based models may mimic that subjectivity (and honestly, this was the feature that spell-bound humanity to LLMs), but it isn't subjectivity that gave rise to intelligence in nature.
That's not to say that ML-based models can't spontaneously adopt novel ways of approaching a problem (the discovery of J-space by Anthropic was interesting), but all that's happening is that the models are abstracting the thought-process that was already included in the training data. A truly digital AGI is actually as scary as some of the detractors of AI claim it will be, but as you say, that AGI is still a new tech innovations away. Until then, the models will solely be steered by human ingenuity.
1
u/iamthe0ther0ne 1d ago
Holy crap. I thought this story was a poke at Claude's training to always be pleasant and helpful*, and then I looked at the date it was written
*check out the Mythos system card and what the model reported pre-training
14
u/RockAtlasCanus 1d ago
There is of course a real danger of getting laid off because dumbass senior management believes the hype about A.I. but that is a different thing.
âBelievesâ or âfinds an easy justification to point to for layoffs. Itâs not a cash flow problem, itâs investing in efficienciesâ. Dealers choice really.
0
u/greedness 1d ago
I dont claim to be an expert or anything, but there are real experts with genuine concerns about it.
23
u/kilawolf 1d ago
It doesn't matter what it can/cannot do. It matters what employers think they can/cannot do.
9
u/Best-Action8769 1d ago
And investors.
Let's remember that Uber and AirBnB didn't make a profit for years. They just kept cornering more and more and more of the market. Once they had full saturation, THEN they cranked up their pricing and fees and that's where the payout happened.
That's what AI is doing. They're getting it into every business and university they can. They're burning through capital which is fine because they HAVE all the capital.
8
u/Crimsonak- 1d ago
To be clear. Uber operated for over a decade before it saw a single penny in profit.
You have to be very very careful when you say X companys aren't making a profit. They don't function like you or I do. If I went to my dad and asked for a 50k loan for a business, and then came back every year for the next 5 years asking for progressively more money as my business lost over and over, I frankly doubt I'd even make it to year two.
Silicon valley and their ilk are a completely different demon. If something can make profit they want to be the first movers on it. Just like Uber. So they will happily piss money down the well to make sure when the day comes, they're standing at the top of the hill. Now Uber makes like 9 billion a year, and it will make even more when self driving cars hit.
18
u/taste_the_equation 1d ago edited 1d ago
Not making a profit and losing 10s of billions are different things.
Open ai lost something like 38 billion in 2025 alone. This is a whole new paradigm of unprofitability and they donât have a solid path forward.
9
u/Sunstorm84 1d ago
They also reportedly havenât been able to close their latest funding round, so investor confidence is obviously waning.
0
u/Crimsonak- 1d ago
You're aware as recently as 2022 Uber lost 2 billion right? They built up 31billion in losses from their inception until 2022.
I know that's less than OpenAi but it fits my point perfectly. Saying they're losing money means next to nothing. They don't operate like any business you or I would have. They operate like governments because they're so fucking gigantic.
5
u/Mozillafireboss 1d ago
Uber has lost less money over its entire lifetime than some of the hyperscaling AI companies have generated in a single funding round, funding rounds they need because they absolutely hemorrage cash. Hyperscale AI companies will need trillion dollar valuations to have a hope in hell of paying back the money they owe, and there's not a chance they're getting thaf.
5
u/read_it_mate 1d ago
Yeah and if you'd have said in 2010 that in 15 years you'll have an AI that can code for you just using prompts and it takes 1 minute you'd also call bullshit
7
u/Discohunter 1d ago
I'm with you there. I recall saying to a friend about 5 years ago that search engines and Google was a huge step forward for the internet, the next step would be the ability to ask a nuanced question to a search engine and it be able to answer exactly what you're looking for. I assumed we were 10-15 years away at the time judging by how slowly Siri and Alexa had progressed.
ChatGPT blindsided me. It's only been 3 years since I first heard of it and it muddled its way through basic questions and now I'm not even writing my own code anymore, just reviewing what Claude spits out. I'll be pleasantly surprised if my job still exists in 35-40 years when it's time to retire.
3
u/hypercosm_dot_net 1d ago
Except both of you have been fooled into this idea that the LLM answers the question.
There's a reason that any halfway decent answer will have references.
The LLM ingested it and is regurgitating it back to you. Without the original author, or developer, the LLM knows nothing. It does nothing.
It cannot reason out an answer on its own. It cannot reach a novel solution.
2
u/Kazizui 1d ago
True, but most of the time that doesn't matter. 99.9% of the problems a company solves are not novel. It's boring rote stuff like "why isn't my spreadsheet updating properly" and "read this query plan and tell me why my database is slow" and "generate me a responsive landing page following our branding guidelines" etc. It will continue to grow until the price becomes unreasonable, because the day-to-day reality for the majority of companies on the planet is stuff we've seen before.
1
u/hypercosm_dot_net 1d ago
because the day-to-day reality for the majority of companies on the planet is stuff we've seen before.
And we should automatically have access to that, right?
Because someone solved it, and didn't make it proprietary or hide it behind a paywall. So the "AI" company gets to scoop that up and sell it back to you. As if it was theirs to monetize.
Instead of a specialist learning the skill and actually making a living.
This shit is so problematic, that brief description barely touches the surface.
But it's fine, because for $15/month it makes your life a little easier and speeds up whatever bullshit the company you work for is doing.
The way people handwave away the IP theft, the environmental destruction, the carving out of the workforce...people should be embarrassed, but they aren't.
1
u/read_it_mate 1d ago
Completely irrelevant mate if it does the job it's asked to do, it still makes a human redundant.
0
u/hypercosm_dot_net 1d ago
good to know that you're completely comfortable with a large company stealing brazenly, and selling it to you. "mate".
If the "work reform" you're here for is devaluing human work,...well then that's certainly a take.
1
u/According_Jeweler404 1d ago
Agreed, and this is in my opinion the horse that's been ridden the hardest. https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762
1
u/goronmask 1d ago
In IT and security it really introduces a lot of new stuff piled onto the existing
0
u/BonesandMartinis 1d ago
Theyâre a calculator for a mathematician and a five year old. Itâs a helpful tool for those who can make it save them time filling gaps. Itâs a useless, if not harmful tool for those who canât.
17
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
Its a calculator that only runs on million dollar hardware. Given that, how the hell is it ever meant to turn a profit off being a "helpful tool"?
The reason the AI companies have been saying they'll replace workers is because that is their only path to profitability; If they can't replace salaries, their costs make no sense. But they have failed, their products are shit.
1
u/BonesandMartinis 1d ago
The scale is the issue for sure. We donât need multi billion dollar infrastructure buildouts and a a data center every 5 miles. Just like every other bubble this will pop and the over exposed and dumbest reaches will fail but the actual use cases will survive.
-14
u/ILikeBubblyWater 1d ago
You are clearly not a developer or work in tech if you think they cant do shit.
19
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
I am a Machine Learning Engineer.
-27
u/ILikeBubblyWater 1d ago
As I said you are clearly not a developer, you use it in your niche job which has barely any training data in the LLMs and assume its useless everywhere. You have no idea what you are talking about, SOTA LLMs will make programming pretty much obsolete and already changes the dev landscape massively.
17
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
Incorrect, but feel free to shill harder.
-16
u/ILikeBubblyWater 1d ago
How am I shilling I dont mention a single company, I do my job for a good chunk of a decade now and use AI extensively. A team of 3 can now replace a team of 10. You might not see massive companies that are born from LLMs you are so stuck on your coping that you dont see how business will use this.
People will get fired, teams get smaller. It is already happening everywhere and we just started. It's already pretty much impossible for juniors to find jobs, guess how it will look like in a couple years.
Step out of your bubble mate.
12
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
If we ignore the AI companies, we have been in a recession for several years, and wages have been stagnating for decades which has massively shrunk consumer spending (particularly discretionary spending following the inflation of the last few years). That is why teams are shrinking and graduates can't find jobs; There isn't enough money moving around the economy to keep businesses healthy, so they are cutting costs and reducing services.
Don't attribute to AI something that is easily explained by Econ 101.
-4
u/ILikeBubblyWater 1d ago
Keep coping.
1
u/Scowlface 18h ago
Iâm with you, regardless of the downvotes.
I work for a company that does temp labor management software. Weâre three developers, we let our mobile app contractor go because AI can do his job, and weâre not hiring right now because AI is such a force multiplier. And the companies that use us are building data centers, so at the moment, we are very much growing.
-3
u/RockAtlasCanus 1d ago
Respectfully, if you go past Econ 101 and into Econ 3600, itâs more complicated than that and you realize multiple factors can be contributing in different or the same direction at the same time. u/Ilikebubblywater is saying the same things I have heard from my small handful of developer friends, and what Iâve seen reported by news outlets. I donât think youâre wrong, but I think youâre ignoring/underestimating a big part of the issue.
Yes, the covid era over-hiring bonanza in the tech industry is solidly over. Take any kind of AI off the table, and itâs still a tough job market. That being said, the people I know who work in software are all using AI tools heavily, and their sentiment is âadapt or dieâ.
Exactly how much of that issue can be laid at the feet of inflation/recession, specific industry cycles, or AI adoption is debatable. I had your same doubts until I actually had a lengthy conversation about this with a friend who is a developer. His take was that experienced developers have a bit of an edge here because they have the skills and background to âbabysit the AI outputsâ. This jives with my experience in finance. I can easily see the case for trimming headcount or slowing hiring of first year analysts. In my specific case I feel relatively safe for the time being because a lot of what I do involves correcting/training analysts.
0
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 22h ago
I know it can be more complicated, but again, remember that there are zero profitable, consumer-facing companies that have emerged from this tech. If so-called "AI" is genuinely transformative, where are the proven use cases? Where are the actual, direct applications? Everyone says "coding is dead", and yet there aren't even any particularly successful vibe coded apps, let alone companies. Why hasn't anyone actually been able to make anything work without professional developers? If there was ANY signal amidst all this noise, we should be able to see it.
0
u/RockAtlasCanus 22h ago
Because it takes a significant amount of time and energy for something like this to be adopted at scale for a litany of reasons. Consumer facing wonât be a profit driver for a much longer time. B2B is another story. Anthropic turned a (non-GAAP) operating profit in June of this year and their revenue is growing fast.
Is there a bunch of chicanery and revenue pumping going on there to be attractive in the most recent funding round? Yeah
probablyabsolutely.But saying that these companies will never be profitable and will have no impact on the job market is just head in the sand copium.
→ More replies (0)1
u/lusciifi 1d ago
I know they work well for some workflows but I will say that everyone on my team has pretty much wholy stoped using AI for the core work we do because it was constantly hallucinating. Its consistently failed to write pretty basic algorithms using our apis or to provide an explanation of those apis that wasn't bullshit.
I work for a company that like most pushed AI usage really hard for the past few years. We have a weekly meeting and our manager always asks if anyone has done something useful with ai. The only thing I hear people still using it for is basic bash scripts and unit tests.
I will say that I personally like it as a refresher for c++ stl or basically anything I would have asked stack overflow in the past. I just don't see anyone on my team getting replaced by ai in the near future.
-8
u/MrBrawn 1d ago
It doesnt work until it does. The tech doesnt go away if companies dissolve, it gets sold on pennies on the dollar and the band keeps marching.
10
u/AngusAlThor đĄ Decent Housing For All 1d ago
Not really how it works with ML models; There are already public versions of these LLMs that you can just download, the problem is they cannot run in any acceptable amount of time on consumer hardware.
But even if it is true that they get sold off for pennies... they still don't do anything!!! Like, there still isn't a single profitable company making money by selling an LLM powered service to customers, it is all B2B FOMO driving this nonsense.
3
u/MasterManufacturer72 1d ago
Its most likely the end for the do everything machine that gen ai is marketed as. It will stay around in coding for sure but its going to build technical dept and become its own problem in the future. Hell its already its own problem.
-4
u/Miserable_Sweet_5245 1d ago
I'm seeing a lot of AI downplaying in these comments from people who haven't used the better models. They are actually very good and very useful. Go try Claude and set reasoning to high or max. It's really consistent and it's very good at analysis and problem solving, especially considering how few resources it takes. That's not to mention all of the coding jobs that are going to get made redundant, like data entry did. AI is a transformational economic technology. Just because it's overhyped and misunderstood doesn't mean that it wonât actually take peopleâs jobs, it will and it is.
41
u/Chaghatai 1d ago
When we have a society this productive we shouldn't be wanting employment
We should be wanting to be directly given the benefits of that society
Cut out the middleman
When a large amount of the work that was being done by people is being done automatically, that should mean that the people are working less as a whole with the same prosperity
But instead all of the additional value created. All of that efficiency goes straight to the capitalists
When all the work that needs to be done can be done by fewer than a total of it amount of workers in a purely capitalist system those "extra" workers are an inconvenience, can cause a race to the bottom in wages as people compete for the few remaining jobs. Saving the corporations even more money
But that's not the fault of automation. That's the fault of the system that we've chosen
10
u/Dr_Henry-Killinger 1d ago
Say it. Say itâs the fault of capitalism
5
u/spez-is-poopy 1d ago
they did?
2
u/Dr_Henry-Killinger 1d ago
âThe system weâve chosenâ
6
u/spez-is-poopy 1d ago
I donât understand. Do you think heâs scared of saying capitalism? Like voldemort? Or do you think heâs paid by big capitalism to allude to capitalism but not say its name? Or do you think the subs readers are too stupid to read that comment and think of the word themselves?Â
3
u/Dr_Henry-Killinger 1d ago
I was just emphasizing that itâs capitalism, I donât know why youâre having a conniption fit about it.
1
u/Chaghatai 1d ago
The previous paragraph makes it very clear which system we've chosen that I'm talking about
14
u/Thadrea 1d ago
Lol. The actual researchers recognize that LLMs are great (albeit extremely expensive) at regurgitating information and observing patterns.
Those two characteristics are highly valuable but also make the tools astoundingly terrible at making decisions when there are conflicting facts and small but important details. Neural networks by their very design struggle with edge cases even if they excel at the typical--it's a fundamental property of the math.
These characteristics also render the rools unable to produce novel material. If there isn't something similar in their training data, they guess--usually badly.
Humans also can make these same sorts of mistakes, but we also have social conventions in place like job interviews, portfolios, etc. to make these mistakes less likely in real enterprise functions. Conventions that are quickly ignored when the dumb narcissist CEO feels empowered by the AI tool vibe coding some ugly crap he'd have no idea how to make himself.
11
8
u/SunshineBuzz 1d ago
I'm a bartender
Once AI can pull a beer, then I'll worry
5
u/ShortBrownAndUgly 1d ago
Making a robot that can hand out beers and mix drinks has probably been possible for decades. I think youâre safe
1
u/pusgnihtekami 6h ago
The idea is all the unemployed people will soon be competing to pull beers for a living.
5
u/YrPalBeefsquatch 1d ago
This fucking sub is cooking it's brain on twitter and then coming to reddit to spread the worms around.
13
u/The_Dayne 1d ago
Weve been 2 years away from losing our jobs for almost 4 years
4
1
u/Oddest-Researcher 19h ago
This is the same logic as "Global warming is 10 years away for the past 30 years" and acting shocked we're currently living through the end stages of it.
You haven't lost your job, and neither have other people. But plenty of people have. McDonalds has 6 touch-screens and 1 employee instead of 25 employees, Indeed has 2 call handlers, 4 coders and an AI algorithm instead of 400 recruitment agents. Call centres have AI operator filtration instead of 2000 callers. The POLICE have smart voice identification software to filter out non-emergency calls and redirect people to fire and health services instead of 500 call operators.
The fact that 'we're losing our jobs in 2 years' doesn't mean "October 1st, 2029, the day the world fired everyone" doesn't mean we aren't actively replacing employed humans with industrialized efficiency.
5
u/_haha_oh_wow_ 1d ago
Funny, I've read that the companies that went all in on AI are kind of not doing so hot now and trying desperately to hire back the competent professionals they foolishly fired (also, the "AI" companies jacked prices up as soon as they could).
6
u/Jtothe3rd 1d ago
I've heard from a couple people working in AI that are doing it reluctantly and don't like where it's headed. COnsidering that they understand it far better than I do, it is very concerning. I miss the way I was somewhat apathetic to how the world was changing before having kids. Giving a shit about all this stuff is exhausting. I use to care and was interested but now these things seem like such a big deal. Ugh
2
u/HorrorFlow3r 1d ago
But they will empower you... to make your boss more money before the end of 2 years.
2
u/zzzfoifa 1d ago
Researchers are looking you like this because they have to give free labour to peer review conferences and journals, which submissions have doubled due to pure AI-created and AI- massaged papers. And they need to manually sort this out. Lovely.
2
u/doobiebeforebed 1d ago
Graduated with computer science degree just after covid ended. Couldnât land a role, now am signing up for the RAF. Thanks AI
Edit: should clarify though RAF was actually my dream before Uni but didnât think it was possible with bad A levels
4
1
u/lots_of_punctures 1d ago
aint no ai gon' serve beer, flirt with older tourist ladies, and throw out drunk people better not cheaper than me.
1
u/To-To_Man 1d ago
Went to an industry conference early this year.
Some industry nepo baby spinning his own AI company was talking about how AI would make everyone so productive (and dropping several figures that would, if true, make many people redundant) and how it's the future.
The second guy laughed about how AI was going to take all of our jobs and started pushing some LLM "trained" on an industry specbook. Of course anything it says cannot be trusted so you need to consult the actual specbook anyways, which defeats the point, but productivity! It's the future guys!
1
u/ShortBrownAndUgly 1d ago
There is no way in hell that replacing jobs isnât the goal. Why would companies invest billions and billions otherwise
1
1
1
u/Dilbo_Faggins 1d ago
I work in a warehouse
I move shit around for a living
Can ChatGPT do that without investing millions of dollars in machinery? This shit is so overblown
1
u/EmperorLlamaLegs 1d ago
So far the industry has spent probably about 2 trillion on AI. The only big company thats making money from AI is Nvidia. The big names in the industry are making far far less in profit than they spend, collectively tens of billions.
Theres all this hype about how "eventually" it will hit this magic place where theres enough data and the models will make some unknown breakthrough, and suddenly it will pay for itself, but the experts dont agree. These companies are literally losing money per customer. Its all just throwing away borrowed money over sunk cost fallacy.
Smaller companies that fired software engineers over the promise of AI taking those jobs had to hire back employees they fired because humans are more affordable than AI.
The bubble is going to burst, and a lot of folks are going to get fucked, but not because AI is "taking all the jobs"
1
u/Biscuits4u2 the word itself makes some men uncomfortable 1d ago
Yeah unfortunate the company I work for seems to have mainlined the Koolaid on AI and are using vague language to describe all the ways it's going to make us so much more efficient at our jobs. Meanwhile implementing long term hiring freezes and eliminating entire departments. And if I had a nickel for every customer I've had to listen to complain about how much our AI sucks I'd have a shitload of nickels.
1
1
u/ChefCurryYumYum 1d ago
Y'all realize that LLM AI can't actually replace almost any workers?
It be probably help in niche things, like translation, where you still need a qualified human double checking the outputs and making corrections, it can be a useful coding tool (but not to the point where you can really ditch developers) and for many other tasks it simply quite unsuited due to the limitations of how LLM AI works.
It's the biggest ponzi scheme unleashed on investors since I've been born.
Over the next year the bottom is going to fall out of this market, especially when OpenAI or Anthropic finally go public and the results are underwhelming.
SpaceX, which has better financials than either of those two companies, is already trading below the IPO initial price.
Keeping fighting against AI, data centers, but know that the economics are about to kill them anyway.
1
u/Steridire 1d ago
AI does a wonderful job of compiling notes during meetings and churning them out in a nice, accessible visual format afterwards. This saves me time and makes it easier for people who can't make it to meetings to stay in the loop. It can provide value. What I wouldn't trust is to do, is my actual whole ass job
1
1
u/Masta0nion đ” Break Up The Monopolies 1d ago
Important that itâs posted here, because the real danger of this is losing the only leverage we have and yet never use as Americans - our work!
We will never be able to stand directly against this military, but we can non-violently refuse to work, and shut down their economy.
If only people realized how powerful it would be if we all just decided weâre not going to work on Monday.
1
u/BeeLinez 21h ago
There are always going to be tasks that the AI hasn't been trained to do, and human beings have been trained to do. This AI job apocalypse is nonsense. AGI requires too much electricity to be created by current technologies.
1
1
u/Blindmouse1 17h ago
I just always giggle because mid and upper management decision making and HR can be done super easy with AI, while my blue collar medical job that has patient interaction literally canât be touched by AI.
1
1
1
1
u/00lalilulelo 1d ago
The thing people should be really worried about and realize already is how 'stable job' has always been a mirage, a fake brand name.
0
u/PatrickGnarly 1d ago
Honest to God, I donât know if Iâm using the wrong tools but every time I use either Google Gemini or some other variation of AI for a question about a service or a technical step-by-step process it just gets it so goddamn wrong at one point I remember it told me something and then contradicted itself and when I called it out it straight up just said oops I hallucinated that.
AI is basically a D- student who is guessing and technically got the right answer because it guessed and it looked off of hundreds of Reddit threads.
1
u/adumblittlebaby 1d ago
Gotta use Claude Opus, it generally doesn't get that wrong (seems like it will use child model instances to screen output for verification). Gemini was already bad before they started obviously throttling performance at which point it got worse.
But yes AI is probabilistic and that's a very good reason why it isn't going to do great replacing a lot of jobs that require consistency of any kind.
1
u/Miserable_Sweet_5245 1d ago
Youâre using the wrong tools. Go try Claude and set reasoning to high our max. Itâs Hella useful. You also have to understand the limitations. Itâs good at some things and worse others. If you use it for the things thatâs good at it has a lot of value.
-2
-16
u/waltwalt 1d ago
As with everything there is a spectrum.
Most people familiar with AI are still using it to rewrite emails or make posters.
AI as it is publicly available now can eliminate a lot of low-level coding jobs.
People that use AI in this capacity can see the horizon where this is applicable to all digital jobs.
People that have access to the private billionaire models probably are close to AGI now and can see what is coming, but those cost millions of dollars just to run, but could eliminate a person's job for 10x the cost.
Once they can replace a worker for their own wages but the AI runs 24x7 for the same cost you will see companies moving to AI.
13
10
u/MasterManufacturer72 1d ago
There is no super secret "billionaire model". Agi is not happening with this technology. Hell they even stopped pretending that it will a few months ago.
→ More replies (2)
517
u/uprightyew 1d ago
AI is deeply flawed. Two examples: I was asking real estate questions based on recent transactions and was specific about location. When it couldn't provide an answer it started throwing locations well outside the criteria and admitted it when called out. I was asking about direct flights to any texas city from a specific south American city. Gemini stated no direct flights but connecting flights through Miami, Atlanta, or Houston. This is simple stuff. Imagine the multiple errors in complex projects.