Skip to content

Big tech has spent $155 billion on AI this year. It’s about to spend hundreds of billions more

Technology
63 48 0
  • This post did not contain any content.

    Spend it all and fail

  • I think there was an inherent demand behind those examples though. Just the number of lives lost looking for the northwest passage showed how useful the Panama canal would be.

    You're also comparing government spending in a lot of those cases Vs private capital. That fact shows how much power has shifted in the world already.

    Well, in the Soviet example everything was government.

    And governments seem to be so excited by the prospects of this "AI" so it's pretty clear that it's still their desire most of all.

    EDIT: On telegraph and Panama you are right (btw, it's bloody weird that where it sounds like canal in my language it's usually channel in English, but in the particular case of Panama it's not), but they might perceive this as a similarly important direction. Remember how in 20s and 30s "colonization of space" was dreamed about with new settlements supporting new power bases, mining for resources and growing on Mars and Venus, FTL travel to Sirius, all that. There are some very cool things in Soviet stagnation - those pictures of the future lived longer than in the West against scientific knowledge. So, back to the subject, - "AI" they want to reach is the thing that will allow to generate knowledge and designs like a production line makes chocolate bars. If that is made, the value of intelligent individuals will be tremendously reduced, or so they think. At least of the individuals on the "autistic" side, but not on the "psychopathic" side, because the latter will run things. It's literally a "quantity vs quality" evolutionary battle inside human kinds of diversity, all the distractions around us and the legal mechanisms being fuzzied and undone also fit here. So - for the record, I think quality is on our side even if I'm distracted right now, and sheer quantity thrown at the task doesn't solve complexity of such magnitude, it's a fundamental problem.

  • This comment is underrated.

    Make the internet 'net' again.

    I'm more about separation of addressing data and data model from addressing services and service model for storing and processing it, to make those uniform, because in uniformity lies efficiency and redundancy and ability to switch service models, and uniformity inside proprietary services is already achieved, so in this case uniformity works for the people.

    I mean, that's probably what you meant, I'm being this specific to fight my own distractions and fuzziness of thought.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    All for it to fail and implode on its own weight.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Imagine what we could have achieved globally if we had spent all that money on a different cause.

    We could have managed to establish a colony on Mars, or perhaps we could have even finished developing Star Citizen.

  • It’s the most inefficient technology but praised as the most efficient because it simply runs on investor money. But that well will run dry eventually and who will bear the cost then? Consumers without jobs?

    I think Meta’s AI initiative doesn’t run on investor money since they do share buybacks instead of selling more shares to keep afloat. Meta makes more than a hundred billion of revenue from selling ads on Facebook and Instagram. So Meta’s AI program runs on boomers clicking on ads that have been generated with AI.

  • Just a few hundred billion more and I'm sure that somebody will figure out a profitable use for AI that isn't scamming old people.

    It's porn.

    It's always porn that decides if a technology lives or dies.

  • I disagree a bit. Any money the ultra-rich invest into research is better spent than on their next Mega-Yacht. Even if AI cannot meet the expectations of AGI etc.

    This research is cooking us alive right now and for what? So machines can do all the creative things while we fight for scraps? I‘d rather the overly rich spend it on something harmless but silly. At least the average joe can make a living producing luxury items. As grim as it sounds but that‘s preferable to what‘s coming.

  • Anyone remember the dot-com bubble?

    They're different, and I think this one has the capability of being more devastating.

    The dot-com bubble was really broad. Hundreds or thousands of companies, all without vowels in their names trying to break new ground. A wild west style gold rush. When it popped a lot of small companies went bankrupt.

    This is a handful of companies with billions of capital buying GPUs from NVidia to be make the largest hungriest machine they can. All in the pursuit of being first to create "AGI". If one of them succeeds, the others are toast and multiple 500+B dollar companies will collapse in on themselves. If none of it works, the same thing happens and it takes a large chunk out of $4T Nvidia too.

  • I disagree a bit. Any money the ultra-rich invest into research is better spent than on their next Mega-Yacht. Even if AI cannot meet the expectations of AGI etc.

    It's spent on NVidia GPUs. Jensen Huang just buys leather jackets from what I can tell.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Love that the pic associated with that link is Mark "Metaverse" Zuckerberg. A hallmark of successful dubious ventures, if any.

  • Imagine what we could have achieved globally if we had spent all that money on a different cause.

    We could have managed to establish a colony on Mars, or perhaps we could have even finished developing Star Citizen.

    Let's be honest here, in reality, it would just made 5 people turbo rich while the rest stayed the same. Maybe make 4 more ships in star citizen, but that's it.

  • Suck it berg produced a platform for spreading hate snd constant relationship drama. Nothing he produces is good or helpful. He jumped on the Trump bandwagon like a little bitch the second he could. He's a real piece of work.

    Why such wealth got into his hands is sick. It could be used for some real good if it went to someone with some compassion. At least Gates is trying to save his soul.

    Bill Gates is only leaving $10M to each of his kids (I say "only"...). The rest he is bequeathing to charity. presumably his charity, but i don't know.

  • This research is cooking us alive right now and for what? So machines can do all the creative things while we fight for scraps? I‘d rather the overly rich spend it on something harmless but silly. At least the average joe can make a living producing luxury items. As grim as it sounds but that‘s preferable to what‘s coming.

    I believe that we are not yet in the end stage of AI. LLMs are certainly useful, but they cannot solve the most important problems of mankind.

    More research is required to solve e.g.
    a) Sustainable Energy Supply
    b) Imbalanced demographies of industrialized countries
    c) Treatment of several diseases

    Like it or not, AI that can do research for us, or even increase efficiency of human researchers, is the most promising trajectory for accelerating progress on these important problems.

    Right now, AI has not exceeded this scope. Yeah, AI can generate quite realistic fake videos. But propaganda has been possible before (look at China, Russia or Nazi Germany - even TikTok without any AI is dangerous enough to severely threaten democracies).

    As a researcher in the domain, let me tell you that no one who seriously knows about video generation etc. is afraid of the current state of AI

  • They're different, and I think this one has the capability of being more devastating.

    The dot-com bubble was really broad. Hundreds or thousands of companies, all without vowels in their names trying to break new ground. A wild west style gold rush. When it popped a lot of small companies went bankrupt.

    This is a handful of companies with billions of capital buying GPUs from NVidia to be make the largest hungriest machine they can. All in the pursuit of being first to create "AGI". If one of them succeeds, the others are toast and multiple 500+B dollar companies will collapse in on themselves. If none of it works, the same thing happens and it takes a large chunk out of $4T Nvidia too.

    I'm sure that silicon valley executives visualise a future where they own the machines that produce all intellectual property and do most jobs. They see a return to feudalism where they are the lords.

    I think this greater vision is about as likely to be realised as it is that Elon Musk will invent full self driving, or robots that aren't obviously remotely operated, or a tesla roadster, or a battery powered articulated lorry with thermo nuclear explosion proof glass, or building a rocket to get the US back to the moon before the Chinese in what is clearly a new space race/pissing match. Or a hyperloop, or ever getting anywhere near to building a colony on Mars, or, or, or.

    But I don't think it is just a case of AGI or bust. LLM's augmented with ai agents have a very real potential to replace a capitalism-destabilising percentage of white collar jobs without AGI.

    Just like the dot com bubble popping didn't kill the web, I do think it is unlikely that any possible current AI bubble popping will kill capital's push to automate jobs away.

    (And as far as I can see the AI bubble is the result of massive capital expenditure rather than rampant speculation, so because I am pretty confident in the 'value' to capital of LLM's + AI Agent's, I don't really see it as the same kind of a bubble as the dotcom bubble.)

  • All for it to fail and implode on its own weight.

    Already starting to, at least for smaller companies and startups that were trying to use it to build things end to end.

    If you use it to provide you with content, sure, easy no worries. building a website? sure no problem as long as it doesn't require any sort of logins or security stuff. an application? well now you're going to have some problems.

    Most AI can't scale something. and most are absolutely horrible at any sort of security. and all of them can't UX themselves out a wet paper bag.

    Now if you utilize them as a tool, a sort of rubber duck, sure they're great. The issue is, and I'm seeing this first hand because of my job, is that many smaller companies and start ups aren't doing that. They're assigning someone, a "vibe coder", to feed the thing prompts to build stuff from end to end. Naturally the end product is an insanely resource heavy, convoluted code, exploitable mess that can't scale. It creates a massive amount of tech debt. All to save a couple grand instead of hiring actual devs. So now when I get a call or email from one of my contacts that "so and so's company/start up needs someone to clean up their app because it's very broken due to a vibe coder" I charge them an arm and a leg.

    So you're right, it is going to fail and implode on it's own weight but I'm going to damn well be sure to take advantage of these people before it completely does and I encourage other freelance/consultant developers to do the same.

  • Anyone remember the dot-com bubble?

    This makes the dot-com bubble look like a kiddie pool - at least those companies were trying to build actual products, while today's AI spending is burning through more money than the GDP of most countries just to have the biggest model with no clear path to profitability beyond "trust us bro".

  • This is not that. They're all hoping to be the next Google or FaceBook. They know damned well most are going to lose. The gamble is that they won't be the one holding the bag when the bubble pops.

    This is as high stakes as tech gets today.

    Some of them are already Google or Facebook tbh. They could run many safer gambles for the same money. But I suspect investors demand AI right now.

  • Anyone remember the dot-com bubble?

    Every time you think of something and don't understand why it happens, it does good to ask about every neighboring assumption "what if not".

    Why am I saying this?

    Because AGI created this way is impractical and economically useless, that's fundamental. One can even say "elementary".

    What if they are not trying to create AGI?

    What if they are not trying to make money?

    What if they want a bubble burst, not fear it, and want it to be as big as the sky, so that Western economies would crumble and their surveillance systems were the only thing standing, together with other functioning machines?

    From the answers depends the optimal strategy for other parties, suppose, maybe turning their Big Beautiful Bubble Burst into just another dot-com bubble, via adoption of this technology for actually useful applications, is something we should strive towards.

  • All for it to fail and implode on its own weight.

    I definitely hope so, like it will with dotcom bubble. If the bubble burst delays the rise of killer robots, then I am all for another economic recession!