• Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      2 days ago

      Summary: bubble gonna burst, when not if

      Why: it’s a fucking scam propped up by venture capital

      How: as soon as companies start getting charged the actual token cost they drop their subscription and for some reason investors don’t like this

      • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yup. Cost for copilot at my work just went up and the tone changed from, “Use it everywhere!” to, “Use it where it makes sense.” I mean, that should’ve always been the guidance but as usual the vendors gave them a good show with their shiny new tech, execs came in their pants, and the engineers were expected to make magic happen.

          • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            This gives me so much hope.

            Maybe one day those who don’t rely on AI would be seen as more valuable since you know, they don’t need an expensive tool and produce the same output, probably even better since it’s slop free.

            Then I realize that our society has made me value people in some shape or form by their ability to produce stuff, and that’s the real tragedy here

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          The article gives no specific timeline, but given the amount of Ed Zitron peacocking lately I can’t imagine later than the end of the year. My uneducated guess.

          • P00ptart@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            2 days ago

            With openAI, anthropic, and spaceX all going to IPO within ~6 months of each other, it’s absolutely going to be this year.

        • pipikia@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Need to look at the hardware cycle as nVidia is still making more efficient hardware to bring the $/token down. BoA dude probably got burned on some loser AI companies that don’t have enough compute to deliver before the bills are due and is extrapolating it to the whole industry.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            First, Nvidia isn’t on a trajectory to bring cost per token down, that’s not how the finances of a bubble like this works. nVidia is enjoying near monopolistic status, as your choice to ignore options from competitors in your comment illustrates. Even if they had credible evidence that Rubin could reduce the overhead of a hypothetical datacenter by 10 million, the business will probably price it at 12 million more (the “value” of the savings plus the value of being able to brag about offering the latest generation). The cost optimization will only come after the bubble pops.

            Incidentally, a significant leap in efficiency could also pop the bubble. The bubble is predicated on all this eventually being very expensive and high margin. If it becomes more accessible without gigantic investment, well the walled garden business won’t stand up. An abundance of supply can pop it just as much as a failure of expected demand. We are talking about the economics of the bubble, and a hypothetical improvement in the merits of the tech does not necessarily map to economic results and in fact commonly is opposed to it.

          • Yliaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I heard google is shifting to per-token subscription models that are much more expensive, and other AI are changing their pricing models too?

    • Mr. Wobble@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The summary is “we’re not your LLM. It’s only 9 paragraphs. Read it if you want to join in the discussion.”

    • impudentmortal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s literally the first two paragraphs lmao

      While the index hit another record closing high, it was only 21 stocks that led it there — just one more than the 20 that propelled the dot-com bubble to its peak before everything came crashing down in 2000.

      Other key red flags behind recent performance include what Hartnett called “speculative” and “exponential price action;” overvaluation of firms that have yet to produce earnings relative to their stock price; a high bull & bear indicator; extreme imbalance and over-concentration, with only 10 stocks comprising two-fifths of the index’s power; and the fact that the vast majority of S&P components (upwards of 330) are now sitting at 20-40% below their previous highs.

      Basically the market conditions are similar to when the dot com bubble burst: few stocks made up majority of the index power, overvalued firms, and majority of stocks are 20-40% below their previous highs.

      • Yliaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        I don’t click on links because the articles are almost always clickbait with walls of irrelevant fluff text, generally.

        Thanks for the conclusion at end cause I didn’t get the stuff above it lol.