this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2025
37 points (100.0% liked)

askchapo

23142 readers
203 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net
khizuo@hexbear.net
Sulvy@hexbear.net
Wakmrow@hexbear.net
37
What is the argument that we’re NOT in an AI bubble? (hexbear.net)
submitted 4 days ago by CleverOleg@hexbear.net to c/askchapo@hexbear.net
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Part of me feels the fact that EVERYONE is saying that there’s a huge AI bubble makes me wonder if there’s actually a possibility there isn’t an AI bubble. Because I was around for the dot com and GFC bubbles and no one (not really) saw those coming. Also, China is pretty much doing everything right these days, and they seem to believe in AI too.

And I’m not against AI in any and all forms. Like, I think there’s huge potential in translating foreign languages. I think it would be cool if people could talk in their native languages but have AI translate things perfectly - which I understand is something AI can do. There are some simple functions in my job (like searching through and summarizing things from our very massive list of policies). But even thinking about the absolute best case scenarios for AI, I can see how the current expectations are even close to what the reality can be.

So what is the argument that we’re not in a bubble, even if we don’t actually believe it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] insurgentrat@hexbear.net 18 points 4 days ago (4 children)

There aren't really good arguments that we're not. The language is so muddied by hype (what is AI? Is a support vector machine AI? A neural network? A baysenian spam filter? Are we talking about LLMs and diffusion algorithms only?) it's hard to know what people are even talking about.

Given most of the hype is specifically around stacks based on LLMs which have so far, under serious scientific study, failed by make any real money for anyone it's highly unlikely that selling GPUs to run these things is worth more than like all medicine production.

The industry has spent other people's money at a literally unprecedented rate, for tools which so far haven't been demonstrates as useful for more than roleplaying toys.

It's quite possible when the dust settles more careful design will discover some use, but they're far too expensive to remain just toys and most people on the field of machine learning consider them a dead end technology.

[–] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 16 points 4 days ago (2 children)

generative AI has eaten all the legitimate machine learning things and made a bunch of absurd promises that are obviously undeliverable to anyone smarter than an MBA. there's also the wild circlejerk of investment between nvidia, open ai, and some other companies. taken together that's what people are talking about with "AI bubble"

[–] somename@hexbear.net 10 points 3 days ago

Yeah, there’s still a lot of quiet non-generative AI things still humming along in the background and being useful in their way, but those aren’t the types of AI that let CEOs dream of cutting 90 percent of their labor costs, so they aren’t talked about much

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)