Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy's obsession here.
Technology
28
Beiträge
10
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
AI is absolutely profitable just not for everybody.
Who is it profitable for right now? The only ones I see are the ones selling shovels in a gold rush, like Nvidia.
-
Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy's obsession here. The value is absolutely inflated but it's definitely real value and LLMs are not going to disappear unless we create a better AI technology.
In general we're way past the point of tech bubbles popping. Software markets move incredibly fast and are incredibly resilient to this. There literally hasn't been a software bubble popping since dotcom boom. Prove me wrong.
Even if you see problems with LLMs and AI in general this hopeful doomerism is really not helping anyone. Now instead of spending effort on improving things people are these angry, passive, delusional accelerationists without any self awareness.
Sort of agreed. I disagree with the people around here acting like AI will crash and burn, never to be seen again. It's here to stay.
I do think this is a bubble and will pop hard. Too many players in the game, most are going to lose, but the survivors will be rich and powerful beyond imagining.
-
people can barely afford food, housing, and transporation as it is.
Citation needed. The doomerism in this thread is so cringe.
62% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. Perhaps saying most Americans are struggling is doomerism, but what percentage living paycheck to paycheck no longer counts as doomerism and is just a harsh truth? 75%? 90%? Do you think the number of people living paycheck to paycheck is increasing or decreasing this year?
-
The revenue of AI lies in mass surveillance and ads. But even going full dystopia, that has not been enough to make AI companies profitable.
Millennials are killing the mass surveillance and advertising industry!
-
In a capitalist society, what is good or best is irrelevant. All that matters is if it makes money. AI makes no money. The $200 and $300/month plans put in rate limits because at those prices they're losing too much money. Lets say the beak-even cost for a single request is somewhere between $1-$5 depending on the request just for the electricity, and people can barely afford food, housing, and transportation as it is. What is the business model for these LLMs going to be? A person could get a coffee today, or send a single request to an LLM? Now start thinking that they'll need newer gpus next year. And the year after that. And after that. And the data center will need maintenance. They're paying literally millions of dollars to individual programmers.
Maybe there is a niche market for mega corporations like Google who can afford to spend thousands of dollars a day on LLMs, but most companies won't be able to afford these tools. Then there is the problem where if the company can afford these tools, do they even need them?
The only business model that makes sense to me is the one like BMW uses for their car seat warmers. BMW requires you to pay a monthly subscription to use the seat warmers in their cars. LLM makers could charge a monthly subscription to run a micro model on your own device. That free assistant in your Google phone would then be pay walled. That way businesses don't need to carry the cost of the electricity, but the LLM is going to be fairly low functioning compared to what we get for free today. But the business model could work. As long as people don't install a free version.
I don't buy the idea that "LLMs are good so they are going to be a success". Not as long as investors want to make money on their investments.
I imagine a dystopia where the main internet has been destroyed and watered down so you can only access it through a giant corpo llm (isps will become llmsps) So you choose between watching an ai generated movie for entertainment or a coffee. Because they will destroy the internet any way they can.
Also they'll charge more for prompts related to things you like. Its all there for the plundering, and consumers want it.
-
Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy's obsession here. The value is absolutely inflated but it's definitely real value and LLMs are not going to disappear unless we create a better AI technology.
In general we're way past the point of tech bubbles popping. Software markets move incredibly fast and are incredibly resilient to this. There literally hasn't been a software bubble popping since dotcom boom. Prove me wrong.
Even if you see problems with LLMs and AI in general this hopeful doomerism is really not helping anyone. Now instead of spending effort on improving things people are these angry, passive, delusional accelerationists without any self awareness.
The value a thing creates is only part of whether the investment into it is worth it.
It's entirely possible that all of the money that is going into the AI bubble will create value that will ultimately benefit someone else, and that those who initially invested in it will have nothing to show for it.
In the late 90's, U.S. regulatory reform around telecom prepared everyone for an explosion of investment in hard infrastructure assets around telecommunications: cell phones were starting to become a thing, consumer internet held a ton of promise. So telecom companies started digging trenches and laying fiber, at enormous expense to themselves. Most ended up in bankruptcy, and the actual assets eventually became owned by those who later bought those assets for pennies on the dollar, in bankruptcy auctions.
Some companies owned fiber routes that they didn't even bother using, and in the early 2000's there was a shitload of dark fiber scattered throughout the United States. Eventually the bandwidth needs of near universal broadband gave that old fiber some use. But the companies that built it had already collapsed.
If today's AI companies can't actually turn a profit, they're going to be forced to sell off their expensive data at some point. Maybe someone else can make money with it. But the life cycle of this tech is much shorter than the telecom infrastructure I was describing earlier, so a stale LLM might very well become worthless within years. Or it's only a stepping stone towards a distilled model that costs a fraction to run.
So as an investment case, I'm not seeing a compelling case for investing in AI today. Even if you agree that it will provide value, it doesn't make sense to invest $10 to get $1 of value.
-
62% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. Perhaps saying most Americans are struggling is doomerism, but what percentage living paycheck to paycheck no longer counts as doomerism and is just a harsh truth? 75%? 90%? Do you think the number of people living paycheck to paycheck is increasing or decreasing this year?
You know the world is not america right?
-
Who is it profitable for right now? The only ones I see are the ones selling shovels in a gold rush, like Nvidia.
Every AI software company? So much ignorance in this thread its almost impossible to respond to. Llm queries are super cheap already and very much profitable.
-
People are increasingly taking out loans to buy groceries. Nobody does that if they have a better choice.
You demand citations for this, something that has been extensively covered in the news, but also throw around arguments like "absolutely inflated but it’s definitely real value" and "we’re way past the point of tech bubbles popping". Who is cringe here?
Americans are not all people. Its a single country that still buys out all Nintendo switches and cyrbertrucks - so maybe if americans had budgeting classes they wouldn't take payday loans for twinkies? The conjecture here is just mind bogglingly stupid.
-
Delusion? Ok let’s get it straight from the horse’s mouth then. I’ve asked ChatGPT if OpenAI is profitable, and to explain its financial outlook. What you see below, emphasis and emojis, are generated by ChatGPT:
—ChatGPT—
OpenAI is not currently profitable. Despite its rapid growth, the company continues to operate at a substantial loss.
Financial Snapshot-
Annual recurring revenue (ARR) was reported at approximately $12 billion as of July 2025, implying around $1 billion per month in revenue.
-
Projected total revenue for 2025 is $12.7 billion, up from roughly $3.7 billion in 2024.
-
However, OpenAI's cash burn has increased, with projected operational losses around $8 billion in 2025 alone
—end ChatGPT—
The most favorable projections are that OpenAI will not be cash positive (That means making a single dollar in profit) until it reached 129 billion dollars in revenue. That means that OPENAI has to make more than 10X their annual revenue to finally be profitable. And their current strategy to make more money is to expand their infrastructure to take on more customers and run more powerful systems. The problem is, the models require substantially more power to make moderate gains in accurate and capability. And every new AI datacenter means more land cost, engineers, water, and electricity. Compounding the issue is that the more electricity they use, the more it costs. NJ has paved the way for a number of new huge AI datacenters in the past few years and the cost of electricity in the state has skyrocketed. People are seeing their monthly electric bills raised by 50-150% in the last couple months alone. Thats forcing not only people out of their homes, but eats substantially into revenue growth for data centers. It’s quite literally a race for AI companies to reach profitability before hitting the natural limits to the resources they require to expand. And I haven’t heard a peep about how they expect to do so.
You use one company thats is spearheading the entire industry as your example that no AI company is profitable. Either you are argueing in extremely bad faith or you're invredibly stupid I'm sorry.
-
-
You use one company thats is spearheading the entire industry as your example that no AI company is profitable. Either you are argueing in extremely bad faith or you're invredibly stupid I'm sorry.
Of course I used the company that is the market leader in AI as an example that AI companies are not profitable you donut, that’s how that works.
They’re not the only AI company that’s not profitable, like I said none of them are. You can take your pick if you don’t like OpenAI as an example.
-
Of course I used the company that is the market leader in AI as an example that AI companies are not profitable you donut, that’s how that works.
They’re not the only AI company that’s not profitable, like I said none of them are. You can take your pick if you don’t like OpenAI as an example.
Thats like saying ride hailing and food delivery is not profitable because Uber is not profitable in the US.
I work in a profitable AI company and can list you a hundred more. I'm not sure what's the point of this delusional lie?
No startup is profitable - thats by design because profit seeking is not what makes your company successful. No wonder average American struggles financially with this poor understanding of basic financing.
Cleaely you're argueing in bad faith and I see no point in educating you so continue to stew in your hate while everyone else grows, bye.
