this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
184 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

63313 readers
4997 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

again: hype train, fomo, bubble.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

So no tech that blows up on the market is useful? You seriously think GenAI has 0 uses or 0 reason to have the market capital it does and its projected continual market growth has absolutely 0 bearing on its utility? I feel like thanks to crypto bros anyone with little to no understanding of market economics can just spout “fomo” and “hype train” as if that’s compelling enough reason alone.

The explosion of research into AI? It’s use for education? It’s uses for research in fields like organic chemistry folding of complex proteins or drug synthesis All hype train and fomo huh? Again: naive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Is the market cap on speculative chemical analysis that many billions?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Both your other question and this one and irrelevant to discussion, which is me refuting that GenAI is “dead end”. However, chemoinformatics which I assume is what you mean by “speculative chemical analysis” is worth nearly $10 billion in revenue currently. Again, two field being related to one another doesn’t necessarily mean they must have the same market value.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Right, and what percentage of their expenditures is software tooling?

Who's paying for this shit? Anybody? Who's selling it without a loss? Anybody?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 31 seconds ago

Boy these goalpost sure are getting hard to see now.

Is anybody paying for ChatGPT, the myriad of code completion models, the hosting for them, dialpadAI, Sider and so on? Oh I’m sure one or two people at least. A lot of tech (and non tech) companies, mine included, do so for stuff like Dialpad and sider off the top of my head.

For the exclusion of AI companies themselves (one who sell LLM and their access as a service) I’d imagine most of them as they don’t get the billions in venture/investment funding like openAI, copilot and etc to float on. We usually only see revenue not profitability posted by companies. Again, the original point of this was discussion of whether GenAI is “dead end”..

Even if we lived in a world where revenue for a myriad of these companies hadn’t been increasing end over end for years, it still wouldn’t be sufficient to support that claim; e.g. open source models, research inside and out of academia.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

just because it is used for stuff, doesn't mean it should be used for stuff. example: certain ai companies prohibit applicants from using ai when applying.

Lots of things have had tons of money poured into them only to end up worthless once the hype ended. Remember nfts? remember the metaverse? String theory has never made a testable prediction either, but a lot of physicists have wasted a ton of time on it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

just because it is used for stuff, doesn't mean it should be used for stuff

??? What sort of logic is this? It’s also never been a matter of whether it should be used. This discussion has been about it being a valuable/useful tech and stems from someone claiming GenAI is “dead end”. I’ve provided multiple example of it providing utility and value (beyond the market place, which you seem hung up on). Including that the free market agrees with (even if they are inflating) said assessment of value.

example: certain ai companies prohibit applicants from using ai when applying

Keyword: some. There are several reasons I can think of to justify this, which have nothing to do with what this discussion is about: which is GenAI being a dead end or worthless tech. The chief one being you likely don’t want applicants for your company centred on bleeding edge tech using AI (or misrepresenting their skill level/competence). Which if anything further highlights GenAIs utility???

Lots of things have had tons of money poured into them only to end up worthless once the hype ended. Remember nfts? remember the metaverse?

I’ll reiterate that I have provided real examples outside of market value of GenAI use/value as a technology. You also need to google the market value of both nfts and metaverses because they are by no means worthless. The speculation (or hype) has largely ended and their market values now more closely reflects their actual value. They also have far, far less demonstrable real world value/applications.

String theory has never made a testable prediction either, but a lot of physicists have wasted a ton of time on it.

??? How is this even a relevant point or example in your mind? GenAI is not theoretical. Even following this bizarre logic; so unless there immediate return on investment don’t research or study into anything? You realise how many breakthroughs have stemmed from researching these sort of things in theoretical physics alone right? Which is entirely different discussion. Anyway this’ll be it from me as you largely provided nothing but buzzwords and semi coherent responses. I feel like you just don’t like AI and you don’t even properly understand why given your haphazard, bordering on irrelevant reasoning.