cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/54396848

If you want to know whether artificial intelligence is a gigantic economic bubble, don’t just take pundits’ word for it. Major investors are now moving their money to try to protect themselves from the AI bubble popping.

For an industry that we’re told is central to our collective future, the artificial intelligence (AI) industry increasingly seems to be built on a combination of artificially inflated hopes and bad accounting.

The industry’s critics have been raising concerns about its finances for a while: the fact that most of its flagship firms are grossly unprofitable, that they’ve had to jack up their prices to try break even (leading their business customers to pump the brakes on using their products), or that many of the eye-popping investment announcements that are meant to show demand for AI is strong have actually been circular financing — meaning different AI firms cycling money to and from each other.

But none of it has seemed to slow the industry’s boom or the relentless hype machine behind it. Until now, anyway. It used to be that you mostly heard concerns about the industry’s underlying economics in newspapers, blogs, social media posts, and podcasts, and that those concerns went completely unreflected in the markets. But these concerns seem now to have finally bled over into investors’ thinking.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 8 points 10 hours ago

If the banks desperately want to sell you something, you know it must smell fishy.

They want to get the growing risk out of their portfolios, and when other banks and investors don't want to take it, they try to find idiots in the masses instead. In Germany, they had the word "Volksaktie" (shares for the common people) for it, and yes, it was about the same, even though back then there still was some substance behind it, and not just greed and unfulfilled contracts like with the AI bubble.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 9 hours ago

    You know, when I paid 2k for a graphics card during the shortage. Maybe that was a good indicator that building giant warehouses using expensive and hard to make components was probably not the best course of action.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 10 hours ago

    I have removed every dollar of my money from anything that is directly involved with AI.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 17 hours ago (1 child)

    they are keeping the grift going as long as possible,

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    This is what happens when investment is done on possibility rather than reality.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 10 hours ago
    [–] 134 points 1 day ago (38 children)

    Not just wall street, some of the pro-slop people in my work are getting increasingly desperate and unhinged.

    They formed an 'AI native team' to develop 'groundbreaking new applications' more rapidly than our dumb old software development teams are doing even with AI tools available.

    The logic: Obviously software development skills just make the developers too opinionated and they stand in the way of AI.

    The problem: After 6 months, every single vibed up slop project has failed to get through QA, and the developers can't get AI to address the issues QA is reporting (similar stuff as people have been reporting with the slop-clones of Office and Photoshop, UI elements that fail to do anything despite looking like they should, the software doing one thing when it was asked to do another).

    The proposed solution emailed out: QA obviously is a problem getting in the way of the slop the customers clearly want to pay for, so we should consider skipping QA and working with the customers instead to fix it. I'm hoping this is the line that executives won't cross, most of them have been chewed out by customers enough over more mundane fuckups that they could see what a shitstorm it would be to skip the only thing protecting us from shit.

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago*

    That’s unfortunate. But less unfortunate than it could be.

    The problem with pure vibecoding is that it can get really flashy results up front, just enough to impress and get green lights. But it’s completely unsustainable outside the simplest projects. At some point, vibecoded stuff gets issues, or one realizes certain features actually aren’t working, and no one can fix them.

    In other words, it’s great that QA is already catching the issues. Because they could have quite possibly vibecoded something functional, passed through QA, and ended your separate effort, only for it to collapse later.

    Note that I am strictly talking vibecoding, though. I know it’s not a popular opinion in this sub, but more mundane LLM “chore automation” is far more practical.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 9 hours ago

    I was ready to type "just fire QA and have the LLM do it" then I read the last paragraph.

    I'm hoping this is the line that executives won't cross

    Hate to be a downer here buuuut....

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 12 hours ago

    As a former quality person this is everywhere. Manufacturing has basically relegated QA/QO to be task based (reactive, paper pushing, etc) and removed from the process completely unless deviations occur (which they do all the time, go figure).

    The further you are from the product the less value you have.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 98 points 1 day ago (8 children)

    QA obviously is a problem

    Oh lord...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 hours ago*

    The more things change the more they stay the same.

    If shit rolls downhill QA is at the bottom and I'm saying this as someone who comes from Ops. I deal with the shit when it hits production.

    Truth of the matter is in any org it goes like this

    Devs - literally walk on water. Give us new and shiny things

    Ops - support the half baked shit that devs promote to prod on lies that "it's production ready we will fix in future sprints"

    QA - magical role that is never filled because "we can just get devs to review their own code"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    Well, they're right.

    "If we stop testing right now, we'd have very few cases, if any," Trump asserted, "Without testing, or weak testing, we would be showing almost no cases."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 12 hours ago (4 children)
  • [–] 7 points 9 hours ago* (3 children)

    In case you weren't being sarcastic: Yes, that's a direct quote from the Paedophile traitor, the Fuhrer in Orange, shitlord of Hamberder.

    He claimed that the only reason america had COVID cases to report was because we were testing for them, stating directly that testing was bad for publicity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    Covid kind of exposed how he operates.

    His problem was that the virus did not pay attention to the media or care about politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago

    Moron downplayed it because he thought it would hurt his reelection chances. If he had leaned into COVID and mad a huge public commitment to fight it he would have sailed right back into office.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (22 replies)
    [–] 65 points 1 day ago (7 children)

    One of the "leaders" of the industry posted an $80 billion loss this year. Wall Street is not nervous enough about AI.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›