You don't have to understand AI to understand the tech industry's hype cycle. You don't need to understand AI to understand business viability, either.
I think the most important sentence in the article is here:
> Half a trillion dollars later, there is still no viable business model, profits are modest at best for everyone except Nvidia and some consulting forms, there’s still basically no moat
The tech industry has repeatedly promised bullshit far beyond what it can deliver. From blockchain to big data, the tech industry continually overstates the impact of its next big things, and refuses to acknowledge product maturity, instead promising that your next iPhone will be just as disruptive as the first.
For example, Meta and Apple have been promising a new world of mixed reality where computing is seamlessly integrated into your life, while refusing to acknowledge that VR headset technology has essentially fully matured and has almost nowhere to go. Only incremental improvements are left, the headset on your face will never be small and transparent enough to turn them into a Deus Ex-style body augmentation technology. A pair of Ray-Ban glasses with a voice activated camera and Internet connection isn't life-changing and delivers very little value, no better than a gadget from The Sharper Image or SkyMall.
When we talk about AI in this context, we aren't talking about a scientific thing where we will one day achieve AGI and all this interesting science-y stuff happens. We are talking about private companies trying to make money.
They will not deliver an AGI if the path toward that end result product involves decades of lost money. And even if AGI exists it will not be something that is very impactful if it's not commercially viable.
e.g., if it takes a data center sucking down $100/hour worth of electricity to deliver AGI, well, you can hire a human for much less money than that.
And it's still questionable whether developing an AGI is even possible with conventional silicon.
Just like how Big Data doesn't magically prevent your local Walgreen's from running out of deodorant, Blockchain didn't magically revolutionize your banking, AI has only proven itself to be good at very specific tasks. But this industry promises that it will replace just about everything, save costs everywhere, make everything more efficient and profitable.
AI hasn't even managed to replace people taking orders at the drive thru, and that's supposed to be something it's good at. And with good reason: people working at a drive thru only cost ~$20/hour to hire.
I think the most important sentence in the article is here:
> Half a trillion dollars later, there is still no viable business model, profits are modest at best for everyone except Nvidia and some consulting forms, there’s still basically no moat
The tech industry has repeatedly promised bullshit far beyond what it can deliver. From blockchain to big data, the tech industry continually overstates the impact of its next big things, and refuses to acknowledge product maturity, instead promising that your next iPhone will be just as disruptive as the first.
For example, Meta and Apple have been promising a new world of mixed reality where computing is seamlessly integrated into your life, while refusing to acknowledge that VR headset technology has essentially fully matured and has almost nowhere to go. Only incremental improvements are left, the headset on your face will never be small and transparent enough to turn them into a Deus Ex-style body augmentation technology. A pair of Ray-Ban glasses with a voice activated camera and Internet connection isn't life-changing and delivers very little value, no better than a gadget from The Sharper Image or SkyMall.
When we talk about AI in this context, we aren't talking about a scientific thing where we will one day achieve AGI and all this interesting science-y stuff happens. We are talking about private companies trying to make money.
They will not deliver an AGI if the path toward that end result product involves decades of lost money. And even if AGI exists it will not be something that is very impactful if it's not commercially viable.
e.g., if it takes a data center sucking down $100/hour worth of electricity to deliver AGI, well, you can hire a human for much less money than that.
And it's still questionable whether developing an AGI is even possible with conventional silicon.
Just like how Big Data doesn't magically prevent your local Walgreen's from running out of deodorant, Blockchain didn't magically revolutionize your banking, AI has only proven itself to be good at very specific tasks. But this industry promises that it will replace just about everything, save costs everywhere, make everything more efficient and profitable.
AI hasn't even managed to replace people taking orders at the drive thru, and that's supposed to be something it's good at. And with good reason: people working at a drive thru only cost ~$20/hour to hire.