Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Agree. The "need to build new buildings, new power plants, buy huge numbers of today's chips from one vendor" never made any sense considering we don't know what would be done in those buildings in 5 years when they're ready.



The other side of this is that if this is over investment (likely)

Then in 5 years time resources will be much cheaper and spur alot of exploration developments. There are many people with many ideas, and a lot of them are just lacking compute to attempt them.

My back of mind thought is that worst case it will be like how the US overbuilt fiber in the 90s, which led the way for cloud, network and such in 2000s.


The whole thing feels like it is just a giant money sink. Are there going to be 5-10 companies that spend 100 billion, and then they are done, no one else can catch up and copy their training strategy? I think much of these billions will be wasted, we'll have power plans that we don't need and then more justification for coal plants. Could it be it ends up making electricity cheaper overtime from over capacity? I think so.

As AI or whatever gains more capability, I'm sure it will do more useful things, but I just see it displacing more non-physical jobs, and now will expand the reach of individual programmers, removing some white color jobs (hardly anyone uses an agent to buy their ticket), but that will result is less need for programmers. Less secretaries, even less humans doing actual tech support.

This just feels like radio stocks in the great depression in the us.


>in 5 years

Or much much quicker [0]

[0] https://timelines.issarice.com/wiki/Timeline_of_xAI


The eBay resells will be glorious.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: