Big tech boss tells delegates at Davos that broader global use is essential if technology is to deliver lasting growth

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 457 points 9 months ago (10 children)

Perhaps it should have been wide adoption that led to a boom, instead of a boom in hope of adoption?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 144 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    That’s just crazy talk. You’ll never create a blackhole moneypit that manages to keep you a billionaire that way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Something something where to place the cart in relation to the horse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Got it. I'm hallucinating about corks and hearses. You're at a funeral for a vintner.

    Rate this AI answer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    That's how faster horses work. If you want to sell something actually new you have to take some risk. Speculative investment is good. It's just group-think me-too investment bandwagon bubbles that are bad. And to be clear I think the world is overinvesting in AI by a lot. The strange thing is that so thinks a lot of financial experts, but "the market can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent" so here we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    The way that sort of invention often works is:

    1. Inventor thinks they have a world changing idea
    2. Inventor spends their own time and money to build a prototype
    3. Inventor shows the product off to the world.

    If it truly is a world changing invention, step 4 is "world is amazed, inventor can't keep up with demand". There are also frequent cases where the world goes "meh, not for me". Now occasionally those are when an invention is ahead of its time, and years or decades later the inventor is vindicated. The other case is when the invention really isn't good, and there simply isn't and will never be demand for it.

    Somehow, the AI bubble is built with people ignoring the feedback from people that keep saying "meh, not for me", and the various "inventors" burning more and more of their money trying to change people's minds. Has that ever worked?

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 244 points 9 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 29 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

    Such an under rated comedy set by DG. Maybe not under rated... just not as well known as it deserves to be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

    Donald Glover (real name) / Childish Gambino / Troy Barnes

    The comedy set is called "Weirdo".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxmJwSEs5fc

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 142 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    AI boom could falter without wider adoption, Microsoft chief Satya Nadella warns

    Fantastic! Let's work to get to that point.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    how can i turn off the automatic ai resumes that get thrown at me at every other website and app?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 91 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    If nobody is using your product then you made a shit product and should scrap it before you lose any more money.

    Follow me for more business tips.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago

    but what about FORCING everyone to use the product whether they want to use it or not? I heard that if you're powerful enough there's no need to ask permission, "they let you do it."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    Follow me for more business tips.

    I am so here for this.

    Dear Rooty,

    We promised investors adoption we could not achieve, and we had to rebrand our best product to create the illusion of adoption.

    This leads to our question:

    How can we make more of our product offering icons look like butt holes?

    Thank you in advance for your wisdom!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 86 points 9 months ago

    Translation: "Please help us justify our choices to our board. They want to know why we YOLO'd billions into making our users hate us."

  • source
  • [–] 76 points 9 months ago

    “Ponzi scheme could falter without wider adoption, warns early Ponzi scheme investor”

  • source
  • [–] 74 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    If he wanted people to like it then he should have made it do things people want it to do.

    It is the new metaverse.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 9 months ago* (7 children)

    Hell I'd almost settle for just "making it work". No disclaimers, no bullshitting. Computers should be optimized and accurate. AI is neither.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    Ai does work great, at some stuff. The problem is pushing it into places it doesn’t belong.

    It’s a good grammar and spell check. It helps me get a lot of English looking more natural.

    It’s also great for troubleshooting consumer electronics.

    It’s far better at search than google.

    Even then it can only help, not replace folks or complete tasks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Ai does work great, at some stuff. The problem is pushing it into places it doesn’t belong.

    I can generally agree with this, but I think a lot of people overestimate where it DOES belong.

    For example, you'll see a lot of tech bros talking about how AI is great at replacing artists, but a bunch of artists who know their shit can show you every possible way this just isn't as good as human-made works, but those same artists might say that AI is still incredibly good at programming... because they're not programmers.

    It’s a good grammar and spell check.

    Totally. After all, it's built on a similar foundation to existing spellcheck systems: predict the likely next word. It's good as a thesaurus too. (e.g. "what's that word for someone who's full of themselves, self-centered, and boastful?" and it'll spit out "egocentric")

    It’s also great for troubleshooting consumer electronics.

    Only for very basic, common, or broad issues. LLMs generally sound very confident, and provide answers regardless of if there's actually a strong source. Plus, they tend to ignore the context of where they source information from.

    For example, if I ask it how to change X setting in a niche piece of software, it will often just make up an entire name for a setting or menu, because it just... has to say something that sounds right, since the previous text was "Absolutely! You can fix x by..." and it's just predicting the most likely term, which isn't going to be "wait, nevermind, sorry I don't think that's a setting that even exists!", but a made up name instead. (this is one of the reasons why "thinking" versions of models perform better, because the internal dialogue can reasonably include a correction, retraction, or self-questioning)

    It will pull from names and text of entirely different posts that happened to display on the page it scraped, make up words that never appeared on any page, or infer a meaning that doesn't actually exist.

    But if you have a more common question like "my computer is having x issues, what could this be?" it'll probably give you a good broad list, and if you narrow it down to RAM issues, it'll probably recommend you MemTest86.

    It’s far better at search than google.

    As someone else already mentioned, this is mostly just because Google deliberately made search worse. Other search engines that haven't enshittified, like the one I use (Kagi), tend to give much better results than Google, without you needing to use AI features at all.

    On that note though, there is actually an interesting trend where AI models tend to pick lower-ranked, less SEO-optimized pages as sources, but still tend to pick ones with better information on average. It's quite interesting, though I'm no expert on that in particular and couldn't really tell you why other than "it can probably interpret the context of a page better than an algorithm made to do it as quickly as possible, at scale, returning 30 results in 0.3 seconds, given all the extra computing power and time."

    Even then it can only help, not replace folks or complete tasks.

    Agreed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago*

    I find that people only think its good when using it for something they dont already know, so then they believe everything it says. Catch 22. When they use it for something they already know, its very easy to see how it lies and makes up shit because its a markov chain on steroids and is not impressive in any way. Those billions could have housed and fed every human in a starving country but instead we have the digital equivalent of funko pop minions.

    I also find in daily life those who use it and brag about it are 95% of the time the most unintelligent people i know.

    Note this doesnt apply to machine learning.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago*

    We'll have to agree to disagree. To go through your points, spell check I don't find particularly impressive. That was solved previously without requiring the power demands of a small town. Grammer, maybe - but in my experience my "LLM powered" keyboard's suggestions are still worse than old T9 input.

    I've had no luck troubleshooting anything with AI. It's often trained on old data, tries to instruct you to change settings that don't exist, or dreams up controls that might appear on "similar" hardware. Sure you can perhaps infer a solution, maybe, but it's rarely correct at first response. It'll happily run you through steps that are inconsequential to fixing a problem.

    Finally, it might be better than indexed search NOW - but mostly because LLMs wrecked that too. I used to be able to use a couple search operators and get directly to the information I needed - now search is reduced to shifting through slop SEO sites.

    And it does all this half assing while using enough power to justify dedicated nuclear reactors. I cant help but feel we've regressed on so many fronts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago

    Fundamentally due to it's design, LLMs are digital duct tape.

    The entire history of computer science has been making compromises between efficient machine code and human readable language. LLM's solve this in a beautifully janky way, like duct tape.

    But it's ultimately still a compromise, you'll never get machine accuracy from an LLM because it's sole purpose is to fulfill the "human readable" part of that deal. So it's applications are revolutionary in the same way as "how did you put together this car engine with only duct tape?" kind of way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 62 points 9 months ago

    "This totally amazing new product that everyone will definitely want might turn into a total failure if everyone doesn't actually want it. Clearly, this is your fault for not wanting it hard enough, and not our fault for shoving a totally unwanted product down everyone's throats."

  • source
  • [–] 51 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Stop calling LLMs ‘AI’, there’s nothing intelligent about regurgitating statistically luke-warm refried Reddit threads.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    As this asshole and his asshole company tries to force adoption via shoving it down Windows 11 users without consent.

    Reminder that now is a great time to switch to Linux desktop.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 47 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    If people aren't adopting it, it's not a boom.

    It's an investment boom.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 44 points 9 months ago

    Translation:

    “AI bubble could burst without us shoehorning it into everything, Microsoft chief Satya Nadella warns”

  • source
  • [–] 41 points 9 months ago

    Big tech boss tells delegates at Davos that broader global use is essential if technology is to deliver lasting growth

    Let me rephrase:

    "Smart" entitled person says our product is not showing value, so we need to force people to use it more than we already are after years of cramming it down their throats.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 9 months ago

    So they‘re finally reaching the „we could fail…“ stage of the hype cycle. This is great news, actually. The sooner this charade ends the lesser destructive it will be. Even when it already caused devastating damage to society.

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 9 months ago

    Don't threaten me with a good time

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    "People don't want our product and we're in danger of failure, wahhh" -capitalist oligarch

    Something something free market dynamics something something. Oh wait, they only believe in that when it means deregulating, but if it means letting their company fail then all of a sudden everyone else has a responsibility to carry weight for them?

    Privatized profits and socialized losses. Damn greedy crooks.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    That’s right. He bought $TRUMP so we get to bail out their shitty company when AI “boom” implodes on itself. Banana republic go brrrr

    Such a waste.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago

    It would be really funny if the whole world decides to dump its US treasury bonds all at once, so that when the AI bubble does burst the US has nothing with which to bail out the tech companies responsible, and the rest of the world doesn't have to share the brunt of the fall...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 111 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    You could have every single piece of technology on the planet using AI and it would still falter, because HUMANS DON'T WANT AI! Time and time again it's been shown that people don't like this shit. You're spending money that hasn't been made, on ram that hasn't been produced, to be installed in AI data centers that haven't been built, to run AI farms that have zero interest from humans, to chase profits that will never come.

    I would normally say "congratulations, you fell for it again", except nobody is tricking you here. YOU are the one tricking yourself. Every expert has stated that CEOs everywhere report no actual benefit from their AI use. Tech experts everywhere report that customers don't want AI in their toilet. Or their toaster. Or their TV. Or their cell phone.

    So who is this for?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 9 months ago

    You mean you're telling me that the technology that can't even correctly predict my next word in my text messages, is untrustworthy at an even bigger scale? I remember when AI first came out and I talked about that, they went on and on about how they're different.

    Also, please don't anyone forget that the CEOs of these corporations were firing and replacing their workers in proportion to the amount of trust they gave LLMs. Do not forget.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    It’s simple, really.

    You’ll save everything to the cloud. Your work really likes this, as they don’t have to maintain their own share drives anymore. All your files are on OneDrive.

    Home users can no longer afford their own computing. The PC is dead. All the parts have been scooped up to build out massive AI data centers. All they can do is afford “dumb terminals”: cheap tablets and laptops that can’t do much on their own, but can stream cloud apps, videos, games exceedingly well. Most don’t care because they don’t want to be bothered with “all this IT stuff. God, those computer guys are annoying!”

    LLMs are only actually “good” at one thing, analysis of text (including non-English languages and also computer file formats).

    Microsoft and others will use their new trove of information, with their new tools of analysis, to get ahead of the market. Imagine what companies would pay for the “intelligence” of knowing what their competitors are thinking, as they type it out. Imagine what governments would pay for near instant knowledge of who disagrees with them. Imagine what advertisers might get for bids for when they can guarantee someone’s thought pattern will result in a successful sale.

    And big tech will charge us all for the privilege, or we will get left behind and unable to participate in society. When Microsoft turns off the lights, you’re basically homeless and unable to work.

    It needs to crash and burn before this can ever happen. It needs to be ended now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    You had me until:

    Imagine what companies would pay for the “intelligence” of knowing what their competitors are thinking

    Right there is the reason why it will fall apart once it hits critical mass.

    The little guys might not have a choice but the big players will run away from the cloud if it means they lose their edge.

    I kind of agree with you but from experience I know when businesses get way waaay too big, they kind of trip over themselves cause of all the tech debt and spaghetti code

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Oh, I don’t think it’ll work. They’ve sold their own snake oil to themselves. It’s a modern day Mechanical Turk. They’re in love with Eliza.

    LLMs are quite fast at summarizing large blobs of data though, and they’re so desperate to be first to market with this capability. They think they can become the all-seeing eye of Sauron (I mean…Palantir? Cmon), and they are salivating at the chance that it will work out for them.

    But they will fuck up computing for everyone else to get the chance. Already have, in fact.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    Man, I cannot wait for the comedy movies that come out based on this farce, explaining exactly how these jokers lost all their money.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    The best comedies will be made by them... like the NFT cartoon that was made using the bored ape pictures that was so bad that even the biggest advocates of NFTs had no idea what the hell they were doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Unless someone bails them out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Who's going to do that? Everyone with any money is already leveraged up to the eyeballs in this shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    So you're saying they're too big to fail?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Oh, we'll see about that.

    The key difference between tech giants and the banks, is the tech giants aren't holding everyone's money hostage.

    Sure, those gen Z kids will lose all their photos of grandma because they couldn't fathom a world without Instagram, but we'll cope.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    No, but when the AI bubble bursts it will wipe out between roughly 40% and 60% of the value of the US’s stock market, depending on which estimate you go by. For comparison, the initial crash of 1929 saw the stock market losing around a third of its value.

    So either the government does bail them out, or it’ll be worse than that crash was.

    Neither option is good for the little people

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 9 months ago
    [–] 33 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    He means the LLM boom. Their conflating LLMs with all of AI is nonsense.

    There are plenty of other machine learning projects, even ones using Transformer-based neural networks), that are doing just fine because they are not built on top of ridiculous business models like 'buy every bit of computer hardware and hope someone makes something to run on it'.

    The faster this thing crashes, the faster all consumer electronics becomes cheaper.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago

    I think the backlash to LLM is already hurting all AI projects and will be especially bad when that bubble pops.

    Everyone's going to think all AI, and AGI, projects are LLMs and scoff at them.

    The magic that used to be tied to the term AI is dead by fraud.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 9 months ago

    The stone hasn't bled enough. Squeeze harder.

    • The American Economy
  • source
  • [–] 31 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    This isn't how fucking markets work you God damn dweebs. Has nobody in Silicon Valley taken econ 101

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    I really think they did it so easily with the adoption of the smartphone and the centralized Internet they genuinely are confused why their strategy isn't working this time around.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I would also like to add that this is our fault as consumers for lapping up and becoming dependent on the smartphone and centralized Internet. (Though on the fediverse you are probably aware of that, but almost all of the content here originates from it).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    The big difference is that smart phones and centralized internet are somewhat useful. Smartphones at least. Centralized internet... meh, but maybe a dependency.

    AI is useful in only very niche and intentional cases. A 'generic' LLM is pretty bad at almost everything.

    If 'AI' had been sold more like: "Give us a year of data samples from your production line and we can use ML to optimize time and temperature based on current weather patterns..." (real world use case I was working in on 2019) etc. then they would have really made the world better. Instead, I have crappy clippy constantly reading my email and suggesting words I wasn't going to type*.

    • I don't understand how corps accept the idea that their internal emails are no longer internal, since everything is sent to chatgpt/copilot/gemeni/etc as it's created. Shouldn't Legal have thrown a tantrum over this?!
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 9 months ago

    Oh no! Anyway...

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I can't wait for the full on gaslighting to start. They're going to tell us that the economy will fall into recession if we don't embrace AI.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 9 months ago

    Capitalism: “The customers get decide what suceeds and what fails!”

    Capitalism: “What a load of horseshit, and they’ll eat it up, too, the idiots.”

    Always incredible to me how staunch supporters of capitalism are routinely ok with handouts to the tune of billions of dollars when they aren’t getting any real benefit. They’re even the type say they don’t negotiate with terrorists and I guess they’re right, since they just immediately fall to their demands.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Has there ever been a true world-changing invention where the "inventors" had to beg the public to use it?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Honestly, look at how many people were actually against electricity. People have been fucking morons forever.

    ( I'm not at all in favor of AI. In fact, very much against it.)

    Fuck AI, and fuck MicroSlop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Sure, some people were initially against electricity. But, it's not like they had to beg people to use it. There was enough demand that the main issue was deciding between AC and DC, not whether to do it at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 9 months ago

    "Its the customer's that are wrong" is essentially what he is saying. Anyone with any marketing ability should know how insane that sounds. Build something that people want to use to drive growth. This is pretty much an admission that LLMs are a solution in search of a problem.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago
    [–] 27 points 9 months ago*

    Come on guys, the copilot button is right there…

    getting nervous

    Any moment you want! Hehe.

    sweating intensely

    Just right there for the clicking to improve your life.

    Looks over his shoulder at the pile of money that’s burning to ash

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago

    If that's not a sign the bubble is about to pop, I dont know what is...

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I'm not an AI hater but make literally one functioning AI product bro before you say that

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 26 points 9 months ago

    Oh no.........anyway

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    Microslop chief Satya Nadella warns

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago

    Gooooooooooooooooood

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 9 months ago

    It's nice to wake up to good news.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 9 months ago

    Microslop behaving like a tumor.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 9 months ago

    Don't threaten us with a good time

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 9 months ago

    “For this not to be a bubble by definition, it requires that the benefits of this are much more evenly spread,”

    I would correct that to say 'for this to not be a bubble by definition, it requires that the benefits of this a. Exist and b. Are significant enough to justify the extreme costs of building these systems'

    Right now I don't see anything coming out of this that justifies even 1/10 of the $trillions being poured into AI.

    In fact I think you could make an argument that the net result is negative, even for businesses that adopt it, due to the increased prices they will pay for hardware over the next few years. If it makes your employees 5% more efficient great, if it makes your technology 50% more expensive in return, not so great.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago
    [–] 22 points 9 months ago

    Not much of a "boom" then is it?

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 9 months ago

    Businessman warns attempt at creating profit engine out of mass piracy may fail if people don’t cooperate

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago

    “Just one more AI, bro. Please. I swear. Just one more this time.”

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    26 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post