Time to cancel my subscription.

Classic time value of money situation. They get access to the HW now so they can continue to grow the business. Of course, if you think AI is just pets.com redux, I can see how you'd think it's already peaked. All those years of very important people insisting Bezos couldn't just pull a switch on reinvesting all the revenue into growing Amazon and then he did exactly that comes to mind.

I think you really need to have boots on the ground in the AI cinematic universe to keep up and separate the wheat from the chatGPT. It's moving fast, warts and all, and I agree with Jensen Huang's take that we don't even need further advances in the technology to base a new industrial revolution on it.

But it's pointless to argue with the extremists that either believe it's just a planet killing stochastic parrot or that it's on the verge of becoming Skynet. I mean if someone puts their nuclear arsenal under the control of openclaw, that's dark comedy although it will seem like tragedy at the time because comedy equals tragedy plus time according to Lenny Bruce.

But the AI bubble is probably real w/r to shoe companies and grocery stores pivoting to AI and ludicrous w/r to the money that can be made by the already entrenched players just riding the wave of deployment and specialization. But wouldn't it be nice if the US spent more money addressing the shortage of compute rather than blowing $h!+ up for the lulz?

> But wouldn't it be nice if the US spent more money addressing the shortage of compute rather than blowing $h!+ up for the lulz?

No actually. The best way to ensure growth is in exactly these kind of industries that promote innovation. Sure some companies don't make it but that's the price to pay for risks.

This is a classic case of optimising for the short term and forgetting the long term benefits

So you're saying starting opt-in wars and blowing shit up is sound economic policy for the long run? Gonna disagree. I think the long view is unbounded compute. But I also believe it doesn't take up all that much space, and that we already have the technology to power it if we weren't squandering our impulse cash on dumb shit like subsidizing coal and wars of peacocking.

Where did I suggest starting opt-in wars?

What did you think I meant by blowing $h!+ up? And I gather you are against strategies like China's w/r to building up their own separate tech infrastructure and going all in on renewables and nuclear so they aren't power-limited because you believe these should both be entirely free market operations?

I believe that gives countries that act like China a significant advantage over relying entirely on a bunch of antagonistic billionaire monkeys banging on their economies in the hopes of bringing the singularity somehow. Again, we can agree to disagree here. But we're also forgetting that this is how the United States made Elon Musk happen in the first place.

For pennies on the dollar, we could just legalize and regulate psychedelics and anyone could go meet their god whenever they wish. The stoned ape theory might have been the AGI of spirituality that led to religion after all. Not saying it was, not saying it wasn't, but it's not like Elon Musk has to boil the ocean and build a Dyson Sphere to have a heart to heart with his personal invisible friend.

As for AI, it's incredibly useful in the right hands and it's incredibly hazardous in the wrong hands. But in the US, we can't even depose a lunatic flushing even more money than spent on AI on warmongering and you think we're gonna rein in the tech billionaires? Funny in that dying's easy it's comedy that's hard way. IMO this one plays out in the weakly efficient market of ELEs. My money's on DNA and planet Earth, it's been through so much worse and they always bounce back with new ideas on how to get in trouble again.

Not a doomer, AI and STEM could really deliver on the promise of a better future for everyone, but with tech billionaires driving the clown car, are you kidding me?

Now do AI art and music. I think a lot of the same applies there.

Bringing up computational determinism in the early days of AI was absolutely career-limiting. But now, even if the model itself is deterministic for batch size 1, load balancing for MOE routing can make things non-deterministic any larger batch size. Good luck with that guys!

so much for all that hardware that was going to be obsolete in 3 years...

Every time tech invents something amazing, the enshittification follows shortly thereafter.

The sheer amount of bull$h!+ power granted to AAPL over clones and emulation is one of the early reasons we cannot have nice things now. I'm trying to post the sad saga of David Small and The Magic Sac but apparently that story is behind paywalls because of course it is. But despite AAPL crushing The Magic Sac, no one could crush emulation in the end so there's hope.

Local models and powerful consumer HW and an informed populace that doesn't hate STEM, but that's not good for the shareholder value so you get expensive everything everywhere all at once instead. And if you dare question the mindset of hating on STEM whilst being addicted to its fruits, that just means you're another one of those maximally SV-aligned sociopaths so why bother? Evolve and let the chips fall where they may because I don't see any other options that play out in the idiocracy craving for strong confidently wrong leadership.