this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2026
474 points (99.6% liked)

Fuck AI

7627 readers
1524 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Speaking during an interview on CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" segment earlier this week, CEO of cybersecurity giant Palo Alto Networks Nikesh Arora implored the tech industry to lower the cost of AI.

During the segment, the chief executive argued that the cost to use large language models (LLMs) has to drop by 20 percent by 2027 — and 90 percent by 2028 — for the tech to be useful to enterprises.

"We need to see the pricing for AI come down," Arora said.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] blackjam_alex@lemmy.world 11 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

He thinks AI is expensive NOW? We are in the trial period. Wait until the whole thing pops and then tell us how expensive it is.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 11 points 15 hours ago

fuck him and not in a good way

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Wait, the brain-dead tactics of "fire humans, use llms" is proving to be more costly than "ignore llms"? Wow, what a surprise

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The plan has always been scamming business owners to be dependent on them then raise the price

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Agree. Pretty damn obvious that

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 39 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

"YOU lower YOUR profits so I can increase MY profits!"

[–] Don_alForno@feddit.org 10 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

You assume AI companies are making a profit. None of them are.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 30 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

“We need to see the pricing for AI come down,” Arora said.

As a CEO, you really should know that prices never come down. Prices only go up. Gotta generate that shareholder value.

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago

But I'm a client!

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 32 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

So AI is losing money hand over fist, and the solution is for AI to lose even more money? Thank god our economy is on a sound footing.

[–] BigShammy80@feddit.org 28 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

The irony in this makes me happy.

  1. Replace workers with AI
  2. AI costs money
  3. CEOs demand lower costs for AI, so their decision to replace workers with AI doesn't backfire...
[–] MrShankles@lemmy.world 16 points 21 hours ago

Capitalism VS Capitalism

Who's gonna win? Who knows!

Who's gonna ultimately lose? Well, who gives a fuck, as long as they winnnn!

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 13 points 19 hours ago

"We are dangerously close to needing to consider the idea of near record profits as opposed to record profits... This is like 9/11 + that flood in the bible + when your Wi-Fi doesn't fully go out, but it's on/off again all day and it's like torture, you know?"

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

Bastard, the only factor he really enjoys is cheap labor. F- him.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 48 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I really, really hope that within 1 or 2 years there will be a chain of collapses of companies which adopted this shit.

[–] roboflop@feddit.uk 8 points 1 day ago (7 children)

People in those companies economies (and others globally to a lesser extent) will feel the economic fallout from that in one form or another

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Those companies fired the workers and replaced them with AI already, so the benefit they bring to the broader economy is far smaller (might even be negative by now) and them dissapearing is far less likely to cause "economic fallout".

Even though that's what Neoliberal politicians have preached to us for decades now, companies aren't inherently "good for the Economy" - they might, but then again they might not.

Plenty of companies out there add up to a negative to the Economy:

  • Maybe because they have huge Negative Externalities (i.e. for example, emitting lots of Pollution)
  • Maybe because they abuse dominant positions in Markets due to Barriers to Entry in a way that makes things actually worse for most people (reference: enshittification)
  • Maybe because they're mostly extracting wealth from the broader Economy through rentseeking rather than producing wealth (reference: most realestate investors)
  • Maybe because they're actually extrating more from the Economy than they put back in it (for example companies getting billions in subsidies to create literally a handful of jobs, or companies employing people with such low salaries that it's only possible because said people also receive Social Security support)
  • Maybe because almost all the wealth they produce does not end up in that Economy (for example, they're using Tax Havens to avoid taxes and their owners pay tax abroad or even don't pay any tax at all)

Companies aren't there to benefit the Economy in any way form or shape, they're there to benefit their owners. Some companies might happen to benefit the Economy, often because they have no other option (for example, they're forced to employ people in order to actually operate and make money for the company owners, thus indirectly help the Economy) but almost invariably every single thing that helps the Economy is for a company "losing money" which would go to the company owners instead so they generally fight like crazy to actually reduce it: they try to spend less from suppliers, pay less to workers, pay less or no tax at all.

Helping the Economy almost always runs counter the one true goal for the existence of a company - maximizing shareholder profits.

Further, when a company dissapears it doesn't mean that the Market need that they're serving dissapears with them: in almost all the cases the need is still there after they've collapsed (unless they collapsed because the need itself doesn't exist anymore) so existing companies grow or new companies pop-up to serve it.

It seems to me that companies that have replaced workers with AI are by far the most likely to by now not actually be helping the Economy, not even indirectly, and that their dissapearance might actually improve the Economy if only because their share of the Market might be taken over by companies with better far better and less wasteful management (and hence more efficient) and which employ more people, and hence which bring more benefits to the broader Economy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Bieren@lemmy.today 5 points 23 hours ago

Layoffs. Massive layoffs. C suite will get massive bonuses to celebrate.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 8 points 19 hours ago (1 children)
[–] P1k1e@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago
[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 15 points 23 hours ago

AI: "The best I can do is offer you a substandard "worker", but it'll cost you more."

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 13 points 23 hours ago

Help a bro out to fire his employees so he can be a billionaire.

[–] tigermountain@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

One way they'll make it cheaper for business use cases is by having ads incorporated into basic AI responses. User: "Here is a picture of some rotting wood in my shed. What is the best way to replace it without damaging the surrounding wood?" Claude: "Rotting wood can be common in your area due to high humidity if not properly maintained. Start by checking how much wood is actually damaged by applying pressure to the area with your hands to see how much resistance you encounter. If only part of a board is rotten you'll need to replace the entire board. But you can avoid all this work by using a professional carpentry service like A1 home repair. They're in your area and open now. Their number is 407-322-9112. Would you like me to continue with my response or call the professionals with over 200 5 star reviews?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ha! Wait until they charge the actual costs and profits! You wish you had not kicked out you most valuable employees...

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

Here's hoping at least some of those laid off band together and start non-AI competitors that blow their former employers out of the water…

[–] plz1@sh.itjust.works 31 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Prices for services like this do not ever decrease. By 2028, costs will likely be double what they are now.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

More than that. At the current discount prices, LLM providers bleed money like mad. They will run out of cash soon if they don't raise the prices to profitable levels. Just double won't cover it.

Which will lead to most customers dropping the LLM services stat. Which in turn will force the LLM providers to up their prices even more...

[–] HerbGrower@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 day ago

When my last employer opened up a publicly available chatbot they asked us not to test it because of how much it costs. It was a sales bot, we had recently had the company decimated by redundancies.

A common act of protest was to abuse the public chatbot from a non work device.

The last 50 years has shown that the new model is to get a sector of the economy or consumers dependent on a service then once the competition has faded away, jack up the price. Competition either never shows up or collaborates on pricing.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] orenj@leminal.space 3 points 20 hours ago
[–] Birch@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago

Get fucked. Globalprotect is a shit product that is about as reliable as a 40 year old renault and it being slop coded explains a lot.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 86 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (14 children)

This is so deeply, fundamentally hilarious to me.

  • LLM corp CEOs are getting extremely uncomfortable at the manifestly nonsensical economics of the current “AI” CapEx and recurring infra costs
  • investors in LLM corps (including the absolute fucking cabbages at other tech corps who decided circular financing was a great idea) are getting sketched out at the likely impact on their own finances, as well as the costs of LLM bullshit in general, and its likely trajectory
  • other CEOs are now seeing the very obvious cost issues as well, and are begging to return to the previous (deeply unsustainable) pricing models

I am genuinely convinced we’re gonna see the bubble pop before the end of the year.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] one_old_coder@piefed.social 111 points 1 day ago (13 children)

Not even once did he think whether it was useful or not. We really need to replace CEOs, managers, and the whole C-suite with LLMs, that would be useful for once! And at $20/month, it's a bargain and you can redistribute the money to people who really work.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›