So what exactly is the "AI lifestyle subsidy"? The article doesn't seem entirely clear on it seeing as the last line essentially asks this same question. Some friends and I have been taking advantage of cheap GPU time from a company trying to break into that space, and of course lots of AI tools are being sold below cost but is that really it? Compare "GPU time is cheaper" to the classical "$10 steaks delivered directly to your house", I'm never going to get steaks delivered at the real price but I'm still going to rent a GPU when I need it even if the cost is sustainable. All these tools might get more expensive, or the models will get better so you don't need top end one, or maybe we'll just figure out how to run models for cheaper, but real steak prices and the cost of delivery have only gone up. I just don't think this is quite as comparable.
> AGI won't come anytime in 20X, where X is under 40
Honestly, I think that's quite generous. And I only phrase it that way, rather than more like "that X should be 99" because trying to predict more than about 15 years out in tech, especially when it comes to breakthroughs, is a fool's errand.
But that's what it's going to take to reach AGI: a genuine unforeseeable breakthrough that lets us do new things with machine learning/AI that we fundamentally couldn't do before. Just feeding LLMs more and more stuff won't get them there—and they're already way into the diminishing-returns territory.
>Honestly, I think that's quite generous. And I only phrase it that way, rather than more like "that X should be 99" because trying to predict more than about 15 years out in tech, especially when it comes to breakthroughs, is a fool's errand.
I know! I set a rather low one to avoid having all the HN LLM Koolaid drinkers and LLM astroturfers have a go at it
So is the lifestyle being subsidized that of those researchers Zuck hired for $100M? That's a meaningfully different usage of the phrase than the original "millennial lifestyle subsidy" to the point where the comparison isn't useful. Or again, is it just the fact AI products are being offered below cost?
Training is definitely "subsidized". Some think it's an investment, but with the pace of advancement, depreciation is high. Free users are subsidized, bit their data is grist for the training mill so arguably they come under the training subsidy. /
Is paid inference subsidized? I don't think it is by much.
They mean that AI services will get worse (ad-driven or more expensive). So the models will eventually be tweaked to serve revenue generation, not usefulness, just like Google. Enjoy the subsidized, "genuinely* trying to be useful" era we're in now, because it won't last
The "AI lifestyle subsidy" is a bad analogy to things like 1/3 cost Uber rides which were fun while they lasted. A friend of mine found a hack for the limo service and got about 30 of those for free. I'm not sure people are saying wow, I'm living the AI lifestyle. The dot com boom seems a better model for what's happening now.
What price would you pay for GPU - if it was $10000 per hour would you still pay? What you are really saying is you think there is a reasonable price that enough people like you would pay that allows the sellers to make enough money to offer it.
