TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

AI Looks Like a Bubble

55 点作者 allenleein大约 2 年前

14 条评论

mjburgess大约 2 年前
This is quite a subtle and powerful analysis of the economic role of AI that seems to have been misunderstood in this thread.<p>The claim is: AI is not a profitable space to compete in.<p>Why? 1) Most of the gains are distributed at zero-cost: academic innovation in a model is available to everyone. 2) Zero-cost gains are extremely hard to extract: Business-useful data requires large corps to do massive enterprise change projects to provide it. 3) Profit will lie in between these and incumbents are already the best placed: adding AI to business data systems and apps is best done by the providers which already own&#x2F;operate those systems.<p>The intuition here seems sound: AI is not the kind of technology which creates competitive advantages. It <i>apparently</i> does so very early in a business&#x27; use of it, but it actually lowers the barrier to competition dramatically. Whatever AI company seems &quot;ahead&quot; now, for the above reasons, it is quite trivial to create a competitor.
评论 #34856783 未加载
评论 #34856275 未加载
评论 #34856082 未加载
candiodari大约 2 年前
AI has been a huge bubble ~5 times now at least. Oh, and we prefer the term &quot;AI winter&quot;, thank you.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;AI_winter" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;AI_winter</a><p>Failure of AI translation in the 60&#x27;s, abandonment of connectionism (~95% of deep learning) in the early 70s, government deciding AI is useless (mid-seventies), LISP collapse (mid-eighties), expert systems abandonment, AGAIN failure of deep learning (after seeing CNNs massively improve recognition) in the mid-2000s.<p>And let&#x27;s just not talk about how often specific subfields of AI have been in winter. One subfield that is particularly famous (and I did my thesis on, because ... I&#x27;m an idiot) is biologically plausible machine learning, or attempting to get closer to biological machine learning or &quot;liquid&quot; machine learning. People have been restarting this field since before my father was born ... and it keeps dying, again and again and again. And hey, I gave it a shot too in my thesis, and I failed just like everyone else (technically I succeeded, in that I managed to get the network working ~3 times, but it certainly did not &quot;wake up&quot; the field).<p>I guess it&#x27;s just that people look at biology, and look at combinatorics&#x2F;statistics ... and feel biology is the easier path forward, both because you don&#x27;t have to find your own ideas, and it&#x27;s generally easier (e.g. transformers are 2 big ideas. One, as it turns out, is more or less equivalent to &quot;brainwaves&quot;, ie. positional encoding, something nature has used for at least 500000 years. That&#x27;s not how it was found though. Transformers refuse to train without some serious expected value shenanigans)<p>Meanwhile I&#x27;m convinced most of the progress of AI actually happens during the winters. At this point a lot researchers are let go, and make a lot of progress in the private sector that then spreads across everything. AI, and specifically the more-or-less abandoned CNN networks are the algorithm behind most traffic control systems.<p>Right now particular kinds of generative AI are definitely making their way into the economy, as is a whole bunch of autonomous robots. That is actually quite incredible. That will expand, by a lot, winter or not.
peteforde大约 2 年前
Here&#x27;s what I believe the author has missed: much like Amazon for the first (20?) years, they were not interested in making a profit - it would have actually hurt them, and the priority was to reinvest in their tech. This seems to have paid off.<p>OpenAI is run by Sam Altman, former YC pres and official smart dude. OpenAI&#x27;s actual business plan has nothing to do with charging monthly subscription fees. It&#x27;s more like Sam decided YC wasn&#x27;t designed to be profitable enough, and wanted to make sure he got the whole thing right this time around.<p>OpenAI will invest $1M and offer early access to next-gen ML models in exchange for 10% equity. If you buy into the premise that a solution built on a highly customized current-gen model will be clobbered by a barely customized next-gen model, then it would seem as though being chosen by OpenAI to build a business with a headstart that nobody else will have access to is literally a license to print money.<p>In other words, OpenAI gets to select founders for and then automatically own 10% of the next generation of successful startups. If this plays out, I predict that OpenAI will be a FAANG-scale company this decade.<p>Ignore OpenAI at your peril.
评论 #34856112 未加载
评论 #34856130 未加载
jsemrau大约 2 年前
I suppose its more on the hype cycle than a bubble. Yet I don&#x27;t think we have reached Peak-AI yet -- although LinkedIn is currently packed with posts about ChatGPT and SD.
评论 #34855854 未加载
评论 #34855852 未加载
college_physics大约 2 年前
People really have short memories and thats not a good position from which to understand anything that unfolds over more than a day&#x27;s worth attention span.<p>Remember just a few years ago Jack Ma urging everybody to become artists and philosophers because &quot;AI will eat the world&quot;? AI was pushed relentlessly, we got &quot;ethical AI&quot;, and &quot;explainable AI&quot; and androids doing the circles impressing the masses. Needles to say things didnt work out as planned. AI did not bring the next industrial revolution.<p>Fast forward today and every little technical breakthrough is milked to blow some new life in that dead horse. Its most likely a desperate search of early investors to cash out before the next AI winter.<p>Sure, the tech is cool and useful. But it is also limited and risky and fragile. And very fundamentally: an algorithm does not make a business model.
评论 #34856067 未加载
warkanlock大约 2 年前
As always, in all areas, there is noise, but there is also incredible music being played.<p>I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s a bubble, but rather the beginning of a change. Although I agree with the author: potential products with market fit could take a few years to permeate the traditional consumer base.<p>In addition, I disagree with the author in seeing how the market behaves to see if there is a potential &quot;bubble&quot; (in this particular case).<p>I think the technology we are talking about right here, like in any other revolution, might shake a few trees a bit but in the end, we will see a brave new world.
benjaminwootton大约 2 年前
I’ve followed AI for 25 years, but it’s only in the last few months the potential has really come alive. Chat GPT and Midjourney are jaw dropping.<p>Every CEO and CIO worth their salary must be looking at how to incorporate this stuff into their business. And we can say that with a straight face unlike some of the other technologies which the tech industry has pushed.<p>So C3 stock price mooning I can understand as they are first to a super hot market (AI in large enterprise) which has grown in size overnight.
评论 #34856153 未加载
评论 #34856336 未加载
lordnacho大约 2 年前
I wonder if C3&#x27;s contracts with large enterprise customers are the value? As in, it takes a heck of a lot of work to get an enterprise customer signed up for anything, and these guys have done it, so all you then need to do is buy them so that you can actually pour the tech into the contract? Point being they don&#x27;t need to have anything special in themselves, in terms of AI product.<p>As for the rest of the AI investment idea, the question is where does the surplus accrue? Does it land at OpenAI? Does it make devs more productive and land in their pockets? Or does it land at their employers? This is the unobvious thing about every innovation that one needs to tackle.
Madmallard大约 2 年前
The technologies behind stable diffusion and chatGPT have very high potential. I think this author&#x27;s take is very wrong.
评论 #34855881 未加载
评论 #34855893 未加载
swyx大约 2 年前
&gt; Some snarky hedge-fund analyst probably thought that the sports-bra-ification of AI would happen<p>im sorry, what? i dont understand the reference to sports bras.
评论 #34855879 未加载
评论 #34855880 未加载
andrewstuart大约 2 年前
There were people who said the Internet was a fad.
评论 #34856074 未加载
Havoc大约 2 年前
All of those Uber but for X type ventures coming out of it maybe, but as a technology I doubt it is a bubble.
pearjuice大约 2 年前
It seems to me that after web3 collapsed, VC is looking for a new balloon to pump and cash out on.
Madmallard大约 2 年前
If there was no censorship it wouldn’t be a bubble.
评论 #34861095 未加载