175
It's not just the fediverse, the tide against widespread LLM use is turning in real life (kbin.earth)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

To be fair, yes, I'm just another person on the fediverse for all of you, but for me, this is the reality I live in.

I've always wondered about all the AI hate around here, and if this is just a fediverse thing, but realized recently that it's not. In fact, people are generally getting tired of constant LLM and genAI use. I've already noticed people getting turned off by AI flyers more and more, sentences like "oh, they switched to an AI flyer", in a voice of disappointment. And recently, I was at a trade show, talking to one of the reps at a booth, and it was really interesting to hear what he had to say on the topic. Apparently, two years ago, he constantly got questions about AI, wanting to hear that the products contain AI. This year, people also ask him fairly often if his products have AI, hoping to hear that they don't have AI. And he was able to clearly say, there is no AI in his products (at least not the LLM kind, only the classic, non-neural network kind).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 6 days ago* (3 children)

I dont know if you being right or wrong changes the predictable commercial future.

If you are wrong then the prevailing narrative holds, these companies are subsidising costa to an unprecedented level and a revenue correction is inevitable.

If you're right, the actual (today) cost of tokens is not utterly horrendous compared to pricing... but that raises the question: what in the name of god do we need all the planned but not yet online datacentres for?

I can only think that it is to train and serve frontier models at an increased token cost that is not predicated on capacity based quantisation, and surely that will make the token costs horrendous because all that investment has to create a return somewhere, so a revenue correction will follow.

Best case scenario; the revenue correction arises after efficient open source models are capable of sustaining most commercial activity. Then the world does not need the datacentre buildout that's propping up nvidia etc., (i kinda hope thats already the case). Frontier level models will stroll (have strolled?) on past the point of diminishing returns and will become commercial black holes...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

    All the datacenter build are more about squeezing supply imo. They build them so their competitors can't, and in this case, that also includes retail.

    At the rate that it's being used, a business could recoup their cost in a year if we still had the old hardware prices. OpenAI literally bought wafers and are just sitting on them, I don't get why there isn't a lawsuit already.

    Same for all the danger talk and copyright lawsuits. Sam Altman loves that he only has to pay a few hundred million for a monopoly, they have 1 billion a month in revenue [edited, I was counting all users and not just paying users], it's a drop in the bucket.

    And sure, open models won't disappear from the internet, but their use in a business context is tied to these lawsuits. We are heading towards half of our economy being forced into subscription services. Most of the lawsuit money goes straight to shareholders instead of the actual content creators too (the book one being a notable exception tho). It drives me nuts.

    Hoping for your best case too tho. Fingers crossed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •