• ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Isn’t it good that the money is being put back into circulation instead of being hoarded? I’m all in for the wealthy wasting their money.

    • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m willing to bet the vast majority of that money is changing hands among tech companies like Intel, AMD, nVidia, AWS, etc. Only a small percentage would go to salaries, etc. and I doubt those rates have changed much…

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        They typically use internal personnel and being parcimonious about it so you’re right about that.

    • finley@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Kinda, but it’s like feeding a starving child nothing but candy until they die.

      ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, the brightest minds instead of building useful tech to fight climate change, spend their life building vanity AI projects. Computational resources instead of folding proteins or whatever are wasted on some gradient descent of some useless model.

      All while working class wages are stagnant. And so your best career advice is to go get a random tech degree so you could also work on vanity stuff and make money.

      This is cryptocurrency equivalent. It’s worse than CEOs buying yachts. The latter actually leads to some innovation.

      • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Succesfully creating an actual AGI would be by far the biggest and most significant invention in the human history so I can’t blame them for trying.

        • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          A bunch of people fine-tuning an off-the-shelf model on a proprietary task only to fail horrendously will never lead to any progress, let alone AGI.

          So, nobody is trying AGI.

          If all those people would actually collectively work on a large-scale research project, we’d see humanity advance. But that’s exactly my point.

          • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            “Nobody is trying AGI” is simply just not true. If you think what they’re doing will never lead to AGI, then that’s an opinion you’re free to have, but it’s still just that; an opinion. Our current LLM’s are by far the closest resemblance of AGI that we’ve ever seen. That route may very well be a dead end but it may also not be. You can’t know that.

            • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Oh gosh, look, an AI believer.

              No, LLM will not lead to AGI. But even if they did, applying existing tech to a new problem only to fail cuz you’re dumb at estimating the complexity does not, in fact, improve the underlying technology.

              To paraphrase in a historical context: no matter how many people run around with shovels digging the ground for something, it will never lead to an invention of the excavator.

              • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Ad hominem and circular reasoning isn’t a valid counter-argument. You’re not even attempting to convince me otherwise, you’re just being a jerk.

    • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      The larger issue that people always fail to remember is the energy consumption. We are see massive amounts of electricity.

      One peer-reviewed study suggested A.I. could make up 0.5 percent of worldwide electricity use by 2027, or roughly what Argentina uses in a year. Analysts at Wells Fargo suggested that U.S. electricity demand could jump 20 percent by 2030, driven in part to A.I.

      The wealthy are under sailing like always. Just like we did with cigarettes or burning fossil fuels. We should have learned but it by the time we do, it might be to late.

      https://archive.ph/AqhHz

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Thats a “Parable of the Broken Window”. They could be spending their money on something actually useful.