• Gelcube69@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s fun seeing these companies take a hit and the bubble deflate, but long term won’t this just make AI a more alluring form of enshittification to a wider audience?

    • truxnell@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah I’d say so - but you can’t put the genie in the bottle.

      It’s just fighting for who gets the privilege to do so

  • gerryflap@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m so happy this happened. This is really a power move from China. The US was really riding the whole AI bubble. By “just” releasing a powerful open-source AI model they’ve fucked the not so open US AI companies. I’m not sure if this was planned from China or whether this is was really just a small company doing this because they wanted to, but either way this really damages the western economy. And its given western consumers a free alternative. A few million dollars invested (if we are to believe the cost figures) for a major disruption.

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Socialism/Communism will always outcompete the capitalists. And they know it, which is why the US invades, topples, or sanctions every country that moves towards worker controlled countries.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Absolutely. More direct democracy. The whole point of representative democracy is issues of time and distance. Now that we can communicate fast and across the globe, average citizens should play a much larger & more active role in directing the government.

          • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            How do you solve the problem that half the country can’t even be bothered to participate once every four years?

            Don’t get me wrong, I’m with you 100%, but how would we get people to engage with such a system?

            • comfy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              How do you solve the problem that half the country can’t even be bothered to participate once every four years?

              I assume you’re talking about the US electoral system?? That’s very different.

              but how would we get people to engage with such a system?

              By empowering them.

              Consider how the current electoral system disempowers people:

              1. Some people literally cannot vote or risk jeopardizing their job taking the day off, others face voter suppression tactics

              2. The FPTP system (esp. spoiler effect) and the present political circumstances mean that there are really only two viable options for political parties for most people, so many feel that neither option represents them, let alone their individual positions on policy

              3. Politics is widely considered to be corrupt and break electoral promises regularly. There is little faith in either party to represent voters

              But, in a system where you are able to represent yourself at will, engagement is actually rewarding and meaningful. It won’t magically make everyone care, but direct democracy alongside voter rights reform would likely make more people think it’s worth polling.

              • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                I hope you’re right. I would love to see it. I actually support mandatory voting like in Australia. With mostly current laws everyone could get a mail in ballot. If you don’t want to participate just check that box at the top, sign it, and send it in.

                Your system sounds much better but would require a lot more legislation.

                • comfy@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Well, it would require more than just legislation change. Truth be told, in the US, a working democracy requires some form of revolution since the people holding all the power benefit from the broken system. But on the other hand, organizations and communities (including territories of hundreds of thousands) practicing direct democracy on a smaller scale have seen success with these strategies.

            • lonerangers1@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Imagine you had a lemmy instance that every post was a proposal for regulation in your community/region. Anyone can make a post, some will gain traction and support, some will be worthless and fall off quickly. If the proposal gains enough support it then goes to a vote post where people get to make an official vote. Could be to charge $40 for a speeding ticket instead of $50, could be a trade agreement with another region.

              I think this method would give people equity in the system. Maybe it could also be scored on a curve depending on how much it effects you as an individual. Maybe having advanced education on a topic means your say has more weight to it than someone without.

              I was thinking of ways to move towards this and so far my best idea is to build it and run it in parrelel with what we have now. Get it functioning and trusted and simply try to roll over what we have now. I figure something tragic would need to happen to create a power void for full implementation. Like yellowstone erupting or something. I was also thinking that we need to teach the kids. We need to give them tools to build on so they can take this kind of idea to fruition.

              I am just a regular idiot, so feel free to add anything constructive.

              • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                It’s a great idea. I think half the people just don’t give a fuck at all.

                Among people who say they care- look how rapidly disinformation is spread about anything and everything. Billionaires would be gaming the system from the get-go. I’m just pessimistic. I really do love the idea and I hope we get there some day.

                Based on how Trump 2.0 is going though we might just get that tragedy.

                • lonerangers1@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I don’t think this idea I have involves any billionaires with power. It would be pointless. With everything decentralized there would be no mega corps at all. They wouldn’t have politicians to bribe. They would have to make the majority of people happy with them to be allowed. I also consider that in a world designed for quality of life instead of profit we wouldn’t need to have 9-5 jobs to survive. Our production has been growing rapidly for a long time and all of the proceeds have been getting held by ~1000 people who have centralized profits to themselves. With decentralized communism the economy would be like one big co-op. No company owners, the community would have say in how products are sourced and distributed. How people who invest more in the system are rewarded by the system. Couple things to help understand where my head is at. I think we can decentralize and open source services like amazon, home depot, walmart,… We don’t need oligarchy to come together and use economy of scale. We could have a sales platform free for everyone that could source directly from manufacturers. No mark up, not even in the manufacturing. No profit model at all. This factors in that labor needs are going to plummet. Take media, I predict all media will be AI generated and personalized. You could have a never ending show. One that knows how to keep you entertained. You could even be a character in it where your screen is just the view, so now we are in VR, like a gta map. Now the big change, This will all happen in our heads. check this shit out https://synchron.com/ . We are about to have hivemind irl. I only want to discuss posative implications. I am super fucked up over thinking about what capitalism is going to do with direct access to our subconsciousness.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It sounds like you don’t know what “capitalism” means. Market participation exists in other economy types, too. It’s how the means of production are controlled and the profits distributed that defines capitalism vs communism.

          And you don’t lift 800 million people out of poverty under capitalism. Or they’ve done a ridiculously bad job of concentrating profits into the hands of a very small few.

          • Bohurt@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The issue with your original comment is that it’s simplified on many levels beyond what is acceptable. China has companies working on delivering highest financial output regardless of other citizens and their rights to have fair share in produced goods. They are by no means controlled by workers (why would they accept e. g. 996?) nor creating fair rules to others economically (e.g. Taobao and their alghorims pushing many sellers to sell bellow profitable levels just to maintain visibility on their site). Put it also into wider perspective: China started to move forward in quality of life only after Deng. US system is by no means bad but it doesn’t make Chinese one perfect.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I don’t think you understand how China’s economy works. Seems very clouded by anti-China propaganda.

              In reality, the working class exercises a great deal of control over the means of production in China, and the 996 culture you’re referring to is in fact illegal.

              https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-58381538.amp

              Again, capitalism vs communism is not defined by the existence of production/profits/markets, but how control and benefit of those systems is distributed.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          That you had to qualify it with a date after it had been corrupted by the west, implies that you’re well aware of how well communism served for half a century before that.

          They went from a nation of dirt poor peasants, to a nuclear superpower driving the space race in just a couple of decades. All thanks to communism. And also why China is leaving us in the dust.

          • houstoneulers@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            There are many instances of communism failing lmao

            There are also many current communist states that have less freedom than many capitalist states

            Also, you need to ask the Uyghurs how they’re feeling about their experience under the communist government you’re speaking so highly of at the moment.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              you need to ask the Uyghurs how they’re feeling about their experience under the communist government

              Everytime people ask regular Uyghurs, they’re usually happy enough with it. I’m guessing you mean ask Adrian Zenz and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation to tell the Uyghurs what they think.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              How many of those instances failed due to external factors, such as illegal sanctions or a western coup or western military aggression?

              Which communist states would you say have less freedom than your country? Let’s compare.

              The Uyghur genocide was debunked. Even the US state department was forced to admit they didn’t have the evidence to support their claims. In reality, western intelligence agencies were trying to radicalize the Uyghurs to destabilize the region, but China has been rehabilitating them. The intel community doesn’t like their terrorist fronts to be shut down.

              • houstoneulers@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                LMAO found the pro-Xi propagandist account

                Either you’re brainwashed, are only reading one-sided articles, or you’re an adolescent with little world experience given how confidently you speak in absolutes, which doesn’t reflect how nuanced the global stage is.

                I’m not saying capitalism is the best, but communism won’t ALWAYS beat out capitalism (as it hasn’t regardless of external factors b/c if those regimes were strong enough they would be able to handle or recover from external pressures) nor does it REQUIRE negatively affecting others as your other comment says. You’re just delulu.

                Remember, while there maybe instances where all versions of a certain class of anything are equal, in most cases they are not. So blanketly categorizing as your have done just reflects your lack of historical perspective.

                • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  You should really drop the overconfidence, and re-evaluate your biases and perspectives. Regurgitating western propaganda almost verbatim is not a good sign that you’re on the right path.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Any corrupt leaders are capable of committing genocide. The difference is capitalism requires genocide to continue functioning.

              • comfy@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                No it doesn’t. It requires imperialism. The genocides are simply efficient for the imperial machine creating settlements, but it’s not a requirement. They’re evidently avoidable and capitalists just repeatedly decide not to avoid it because they consider it cheaper to commit genocide rather than integrate more passively.

      • gerryflap@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I disagree. Under the right conditions (read: actual competition instead of unregulated monopolies) I think a capitalist system be able to stay ahead, though I think both systems could compete depending on how they’re organized.

        But what I’m more interested in is you view that China is still Socialist/Communist. Isn’t DeepSeek a private company trying to maximize profits for itself by innovating, instead of a public company funded by the people? I don’t really know myself, but my perspective was that this was more of a capitalist vs capitalist situation. With one side (the US) kinda suffering from being so unregulated that innovation dies down.

  • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hm even with DeepSeek being more efficient, wouldn’t that just mean the rich corps throw the same amount of hardware at it to achieve a better result?

    In the end I’m not convinced this would even reduce hardware demand. It’s funny that this of all things deflates part of the bubble.

    • peereboominc@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Maybe but it also means that if a company needs a datacenter with 1000 gpu’s to do it’s AI tasks demand, it will now buy 500.

      Next year it might need more but then AMD could have better gpu’s.

    • sith@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It will probably not reduce demand. But it will for sure make it impossible to sell insanely overpriced hardware. Now I’m looking forward to buying a PC with a Chinese open source RISCV CPU and GPU. Bye bye Intel, AMD, ARM and Nvidia.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Hm even with DeepSeek being more efficient, wouldn’t that just mean the rich corps throw the same amount of hardware at it to achieve a better result?

      Only up to the point where the AI models yield value (which is already heavily speculative). If nothing else, DeepSeek makes Altman’s plan for $1T in new data-centers look like overkill.

      The revelation that you can get 100x gains by optimizing your code rather than throwing endless compute at your model means the value of graphics cards goes down relative to the value of PhD-tier developers. Why burn through a hundred warehouses full of cards to do what a university mathematics department can deliver in half the time?

      • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        you can get 100x gains by optimizing your code rather than throwing endless compute at your model

        woah, that sounds dangerously close to saying this is all just developing computer software. Don’t you know we’re trying to build God???

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Altman insisting that once the model is good enough, it will program itself was the moment I wrote the whole thing off as a flop.

  • Mac@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    What the fuck are markets when you can automate making money on them???

    Ive been WTF about the stock market for a long time but now it’s obviously a scam.

    • thistleboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The stock market is nothing more than a barometer for the relative peace of mind of rich people.

  • index@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It still rely on nvidia hardware why would it trigger a sell-off? Also why all media are picking up this news? I smell something fishy here…

    • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Here’s someone doing 200 tokens/s (for context, OpenAI doesn’t usually get above 100) on… A Raspberry Pi.

      Yes, the “$75-$120 micro computer the size of a credit card” Raspberry Pi.

      If all these AI models can be run directly on users devices, or on extremely low end hardware, who needs large quantities of top of the line GPUs?

      • adoxographer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        While this is great, the training is where the compute is spent. The news is also about R1 being able to be trained, still on an Nvidia cluster but for 6M USD instead of 500

        • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          if, on a modern gaming pc, you can get breakneck speeds of 5 tokens per second, then actually inference is quite energy intensive too. 5 per second of anything is very slow

        • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          True, but training is one-off. And as you say, a factor 100x less costs with this new model. Therefore NVidia just saw 99% of their expected future demand for AI chips evaporate

          Even if they are lying and used more compute, it’s obvious they managed to train it without access to the large amounts of the highest end chips due to export controls.

          Conservatively, I think NVidia is definitely going to have to scale down by 50% and they will have to reduce prices by a lot, too, since VC and government billions will no longer be available to their customers.

          • adoxographer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’m not sure. That’s a very static view of the context.

            While china has an AI advantage due to wider adoption, less constraints and overall bigger market, the US has higher tech, and more funds.

            OpenAI, Anthropic, MS and especially X will all be getting massive amounts of backing and will reverse engineer and adopt whatever advantages R1 had. Which while there are some it’s still not a full spectrum competitor.

            I see the is as a small correction that the big players will take advantage of to buy stock, and then pump it with state funds, furthering the gap and ignoring the Chinese advances.

            Regardless, Nvidia always wins. They sell the best shovels. In any scenario the world at large still doesn’t have their Nvidia cluster, think Africa, Oceania, South America, Europe, SEA who doesn’t necessarily align with Chinese interests, India. Plenty to go around.

            • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Extra funds are only useful if they can provide a competitive advantage.

              Otherwise those investments will not have a positive ROI.

              The case until now was built on the premise that US tech was years ahead and that AI had a strong moat due to high computer requirements for AI.

              We now know that that isn’t true.

              If high compute enables a significant improvement in AI, then that old case could become true again. But the prospects of such a reality happening and staying just got a big hit.

              I think we are in for a dot-com type bubble burst, but it will take a few weeks to see if that’s gonna happen or not.

          • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            True, but training is one-off. And as you say, a factor 100x less costs with this new model. Therefore NVidia just saw 99% of their expected future demand for AI chips evaporate

            It might also lead to 100x more power to train new models.

            • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I doubt that will be the case, and I’ll explain why.

              As mentioned in this article,

              SFT (supervised fine-tuning), a standard step in AI development, involves training models on curated datasets to teach step-by-step reasoning, often referred to as chain-of-thought (CoT). It is considered essential for improving reasoning capabilities. DeepSeek challenged this assumption by skipping SFT entirely, opting instead to rely on reinforcement learning (RL) to train the model. This bold move forced DeepSeek-R1 to develop independent reasoning abilities, avoiding the brittleness often introduced by prescriptive datasets.

              This totally changes the way we think about AI training, which is why while OpenAI spent $100m on training GPT-4, running an expected 500,000 GPUs, DeepSeek used about 50,000, and likely spent that same roughly 10% of the cost.

              So while operation, and even training, is now cheaper, it’s also substantially less compute intensive to train models.

              And not only is there less data than ever to train models on that won’t cause them to get worse by regurgitating other worse quality AI-generated content, but even if additional datasets were scrapped entirely in favor of this new RL method, there’s a point at which an LLM is simply good enough.

              If you need to auto generate a corpo-speak email, you can already do that without many issues. Reformat notes or user input? Already possible. Classify tickets by type? Done. Write a silly poem? That’s been possible since pre-ChatGPT. Summarize a webpage? The newest version of ChatGPT will probably do just as well as the last at that.

              At a certain point, spending millions of dollars for a 1% performance improvement doesn’t make sense when the existing model just already does what you need it to do.

              I’m sure we’ll see development, but I doubt we’ll see a massive increase in training just because the cost to run and train the model has gone down.

        • orange@communick.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          That’s becoming less true. The cost of inference has been rising with bigger models, and even more so with “reasoning models”.

          Regardless, at the scale of 100M users, big one-off costs start looking small.

      • GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Sure you can run it on low end hardware, but how does the performance (response time for a given prompt) compare to the other models, either local or as a service?

        • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          i can also run it on my old pentium from 3 decades ago. I’d have to swap 4MiB of weights in and out constantly, it will be very very slow, but it will work.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Thank the fucking sky fairies actually, because even if AI continues to mostly suck it’d be nice if it didn’t swallow up every potable lake in the process. When this shit is efficient that makes it only mildly annoying instead of a complete shitstorm of failure.

    • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      And you should, generally we are amidst the internet world war. It’s not something fishy but digital rotten eggs thrown around by the hundreds.

      The only way to remain sane is to ignore it and scroll on. There is no winning versus geopolitical behemoths as a lone internet adventurer. It’s impossible to tell what’s real and what isn’t
      the first casualty of war is truth

    • teegus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      A year ago the price was $62, now after the fall it is $118. Stocks are volatile, what else is new? Pretty much non-news if you ask me.

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The way I understood it, it’s much more efficient so it should require less hardware.

      Nvidia will sell that hardware, an obscene amount of it, and line will go up. But it will go up slower than nvidia expected because anything other than infinite and always accelerating growth means you’re not good at business.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Back in the day, that would tell me to buy green.

        Of course, that was also long enough ago that you could just swap money from green to red every new staggered product cycle.

    • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It requires only 5% of the same hardware that OpenAI needs to do the same thing. So that can mean less quantity of top end cards and it can also run on less powerful cards (not top of the line).

      Should their models become standard or used more commonly, then nvidis sales will drop.

      • b34k@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Doesn’t this just mean that now we can make models 20x more complex using the same hardware? There’s many more problems that advanced Deep Learning models could potentially solve that are far more interesting and useful than a chat bot.

        I don’t see how this ends up bad for Nvidia in the long run.

        • Isthisreddit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Honestly none of this means anything at the moment. This might be some sort of calculated trickery from China to give Nvidia the finger, or Biden the finger, or a finger to Trump’s AI infrastructure announcement a few days ago, or some other motive.

          Maybe this “selloff” is masterminded by the big wall street players (who work hand-in-hand with investor friendly media) to panic retail investors so they can snatch up shares at a discount.

          What I do know is that “AI” is a very fast moving tech and shit that was true a few months ago might not be true tomorrow - no one has a crystal ball so we all just gotta wait and see.

          • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            There could be some trickery on the training side, i.e. maybe they spent way more than $6M to train it.

            But it is clear that they did it without access to the infra that big tech has.

            And on the run side, we can all verify how well it runs and people are also running it locally without internet access. There is no trickery there.

            They are 20x cheaper than OpenAI if you run it on their servers and if you run it yourself, you only need a small investment in relatively affordable servers.

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I should really start looking into shorting stocks. I was looking at the news and Nvidia’s stock and thought “huh, the stock hasn’t reacted to these news at all yet, I should probably short this”.

    And then proceeded to do fuck all.

    I guess this is why some people are rich and others are like me.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s pretty difficult to open a true short position. Providers like Robinhood create contract for differences which are subject to their TOS.

    • peregrin5@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It’s been proven that people who do fuckall after throwing their money into mutual funds generally fare better than people actively monitoring and making stock moves.

      You’re probably fine.

      I never bought NVIDIA in the first place so this news doesn’t affect me.

      If anything now would be a good time to buy NVIDIA. But I probably won’t.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        The vast majority of my invested money is in SPY. I had a lot of “money” wiped out yesterday. It’s already trending back up. I’m holding for now.

  • barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Shovel vendors scrambling for solid ground as prospectors start to understand geology.

    …that is, this isn’t yet the end of the AI bubble. It’s just the end of overvaluing hardware because efficiency increased on the software side, there’s still a whole software-side bubble to contend with.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      …that is, this isn’t yet the end of the AI bubble.

      The “bubble” in AI is predicated on proprietary software that’s been oversold and underdelivered.

      If I can outrun OpenAI’s super secret algorithm with 1/100th the physical resources, the $13B Microsoft handed Sam Altman’s company starts looking like burned capital.

      And the way this blows up the reputation of AI hype-artists makes it harder for investors to be induced to send US firms money. Why not contract with Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence directly, rather than ask OpenAI to adopt a model that’s better than anything they’ve produced to date?

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The software side bubble should take a hit here because:

      • Trained model made available for download and offline execution, versus locking it behind a subscription friendly cloud only access. Not the first, but it is more famous.

      • It came from an unexpected organization, which throws a wrench in the assumption that one of the few known entities would “win it”.

    • meliante@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I really think GenAI is comparable to the internet in terms of what it will allow mankind in a couple of decades.

      Lots of people thought the internet was a fad and saw no future for it …

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Lots of techies loved the internet, built it, and were all early adopters. Lots of normies didn’t see the point.

        With AI it’s pretty much the other way around: CEOs saying “we don’t need programmers, any more”, while people who understand the tech roll their eyes.

        • meliante@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I believe programming languages will become obsolete. You’ll still need professionals that will be experts in leading the machines but not nearly as hands on as presently. The same for a lot of professions that exist currently.

          I like to compare GenAI to the assembly line when it was created, but instead of repetitive menial tasks, it’s repetitive mental tasks that it improves/performs.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Oh great you’re one of them. Look I can’t magically infuse tech literacy into you, you’ll have to learn to program and, crucially, understand how much programming is not about giving computers instructions.

            • meliante@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Let’s talk in five years. There’s no point in discussing this right now. You’re set on what you believe you know and I’m set on what I believe I know.

              And, piece of advice, don’t assume others lack tech literacy because they don’t agree with you, it just makes you look like a brat that can’t discuss things maturely and invites the other part to be a prick as well.

              Especially because programming is quite fucking literally giving computers instructions, despite what you believe keyboard monkeys do. You wanker!

              What? You think “developers” are some kind on mythical beings that possess the mystical ability of speaking to the machines in cryptic tongues?

              They’re a dime a dozen, the large majority of “developers” are just cannon fodder that are not worth what they think they are.

              Ironically, the real good ones probably brought about their demise.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Especially because programming is quite fucking literally giving computers instructions, despite what you believe keyboard monkeys do. You wanker!

                What? You think “developers” are some kind on mythical beings that possess the mystical ability of speaking to the machines in cryptic tongues?

                First off, you’re contradicting yourself: Is programming about “giving instructions in cryptic languages”, or not?

                Then, no: Developers are mythical beings who possess the magical ability of turning vague gesturing full of internal contradictions, wishful thinking, up to right-out psychotic nonsense dreamt up by some random coke-head in a suit, into hard specifications suitable to then go into algorithm selection and finally into code. Typing shit in a cryptic language is the easy part, also, it’s not cryptic, it’s precise.

                • meliante@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  You must be a programmer. Can’t understand shit of what you’re told to do and then blame the client for “not knowing how it works”. Typical. Stereotypical even!

                  Read it again moron, or should I use an LLM to make it simpler for your keyboard monkey brain?

          • Strider@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            That’s not the way it works. And I’m not even against that.

            It sill won’t work this way a few years later.

            • meliante@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I’m not talking about this being a snap transition. It will take several years but I do think this tech will evolve in that direction.

              I’ve been working with LLMs since month 1 and in these short 24 months things have progressed in a way that is mind boggling.

              I’ve produced more and better then ever and we’re developing a product that improves and makes some repetitive “sweat shop” tasks regarding documentation a thing of the past for people. It really is cool.

        • oldfart@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Back then the CEOs were babbling about information superhighways while tech rolled their eyes

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Sure but you had the .com bubble but it was still useful. Same as AI in a big bubble right now doesn’t mean it won’t be useful.

    • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      there’s still a whole software-side bubble to contend with

      They’re ultimately linked together in some ways (not all). OpenAI has already been losing money on every GPT subscription that they charge a premium for because they had the best product, now that premium must evaporate because there are equivalent AI products on the market that are much cheaper. This will shake things up on the software side too. They probably need more hype to stay afloat

  • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Was watching bbc news interview some American guy about this and wow they were really pushing that it’s no big deal and deepseek is way behind and a bit of a joke. Made claims they weren’t under cyber attack they just couldn’t handle having traffic etc.

    Kinda making me root for China honestly.

    • atempuser23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      He’s likely not wrong. Too soon to know how well it lives up to the hype. As well It could be like we had a 6 million $$ budget. Just don’t pay any attention to the free data center use that pre-computed the data. As well startups make reckless optimistic promises that can be delivered on all the time.

  • drascus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Okay seriously this technology still baffles me. Like its cool but why invest so much in an unknown like AIs future ? We could invest in people and education and end up with really smart people. For the cost of an education we could end up with smart people who contribute to the economy and society. Instead we are dumping billions into this shit.

    • sudo42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Tech/Wall St constantly needs something to hype in order to bring in “investor” money. The “new technology-> product development -> product -> IPO” pipeline is now “straight to pump-and-dump” (for example, see Crypto currency).

      The excitement of the previous hype train (self-driving cars) is no longer bringing in starry-eyed “investors” willing to quickly part ways with OPM. “AI” made a big splash and Tech/Wall St is going to milk it for all they can lest they fall into the same bad economy as that one company that didn’t jam the letters “AI” into their investor summary.

      Tech has laid off a lot of employees, which means they are aware there is nothing else exciting in the near horizon. They also know they have to flog “AI” like crazy before people figure out there’s no “there” there.

      That “investors” scattered like frightened birds at the mere mention of a cheaper version means that they also know this is a bubble. Everyone wants the quick money. More importantly they don’t want to be the suckers left holding the bag.

        • sudo42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I follow EV battery tech a little. You’re not wrong that there is a lot of “oh its just around the bend” in battery development and tech development in general. I blame marketing for 80% of that.

          But battery technology is changing drastically. The giant cell phone market is pushing battery tech relentlessly. Add in EV and grid storage demand growth and the potential for some companies to land on top of a money printing machine is definitely there.

          We’re in a golden age of battery research. Exciting for our future, but it will be a while before we consumers will have clear best options.

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      How would the investors profit from paying for someone’s education? By giving them a loan? Don’t we have enough problems with the student loan system without involving these assholes more?

    • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s easier to sell people on the idea of a new technology or system that doesn’t have any historical precedent. All you have to do is list the potential upsides.

      Something like a school or a workplace training programme, those are known quantities. There’s a whole bunch of historical and currently-existing projects anyone can look at to gauge the cost. Your pitch has to be somewhat realistic compared to those, or it’s gonna sound really suspect.

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      And you could pay people to use an abacus instead of a calculator. But the advanced tech improves productivity for everyone, and helps their output.

      If you don’t get the tech, you should play with it more.

      • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I get the tech, and still agree with the preposter. I’d even go so far as that it probably worsens a lot currently, as it’s generating a lot of bullshit that sounds great on the surface, but in reality is just regurgitated stuff that the AI has no clue of. For example I’m tired of reading AI generated text, when a hand written version would be much more precise and has some character at least…

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s one thing to be ignorant. It’s quite another to be confidently so in the face of overwhelming evidence that you’re wrong. Impressive.

          • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            confidently so in the face of overwhelming evidence

            That I’d really like to see. And I mean more than the marketing bullshit that AI companies are doing…

            For the record I was one of the first jumping on the AI hype-train (as programmer, and computer-scientist with machine-learning background), following the development of GPT1-4, being excited about having to do less boilerplaty code etc. getting help about rough ideas etc. GPT4 was almost so far as being a help (similar with o1 etc. or Anthropics models). Though I seldom use AI currently (and I’m observing similar with other colleagues and people I know of) because it actually slows me down with my stuff or gives wrong ideas, having to argue, just to see it yet again saturating at a local-minimum (aka it doesn’t get better, no matter what input I try). Just so that I have to do it myself… (which I should’ve done in the first place…).

            Same is true for the image-generative side (i.e. first with GANs now with diffusion-based models).

            I can get into more details about transformer/attention-based-models and its current plateau phase (i.e. more hardware doesn’t actually make things significantly better, it gets exponentially more expensive to make things slightly better) if you really want…

            I hope that we do a breakthrough of course, that a model actually really learns reasoning, but I fear that that will take time, and it might even mean that we need different type of hardware.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Any other AI company, and most of that would be legitimate criticism of the overhype used to generate more funding. But how does any of that apply to DeepSeek, and the code & paper they released?

              • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                DeepSeek

                Yeah it’ll be exciting to see where this goes, i.e. if it really develops into a useful tool, for certain. Though I’m slightly cautious non-the less. It’s not doing something significantly different (i.e. it’s still an LLM), it’s just a lot cheaper/efficient to train, and open for everyone (which is great).

                • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  What’s this “if” nonsense? I loaded up a light model of it, and already have put it to work.

        • Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          If you are blindly asking it questions without a grounding resources you’re gonning to get nonsense eventually unless it’s really simple questions.

          They aren’t infinite knowledge repositories. The training method is lossy when it comes to memory, just like our own memory.

          Give it documentation or some other context and ask it questions it can summerize pretty well and even link things across documents or other sources.

          The problem is that people are misusing the technology, not that the tech has no use or merit, even if it’s just from an academic perspective.

              • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                So unreliable boilerplate generator, you need to debug?

                Right I’ve seen that it’s somewhat nice to quickly generate bash scripts etc.

                It can certainly generate quick’n dirty scripts as a starter. But code quality is often supbar (and often incorrect), which triggers my perfectionism to make it better, at which point I should’ve written it myself…

                But I agree that it can often serve well for exploration, and sometimes you learn new stuff (if you weren’t expert in it at least, and you should always validate whether it’s correct).

                But actual programming in e.g. Rust is a catastrophe with LLMs (more common languages like js work better though).

                • SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I use C# and PS/CMD for my job. I think you’re right. It can create a decent template for setting things up. But it trips on its own dick with anything more intricate than simple 2 step commands.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        “Improves productivity for everyone”

        Famously only one class benefits from productivity, while one generates the productivity. Can you explain what you mean, if you don’t mean capitalistic productivity?

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m referring to output for amount of work put in.

          I’m a socialist. I care about increased output leading to increased comfort for the general public. That the gains are concentrated among the wealthy is not the fault of technology, but rather those who control it.

          Thank god for DeepSeek.

    • Redex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Look at it in another way, people think this is the start of an actual AI revolution, as in full blown AGI or close to it or something very capable at least. Personally I don’t think we’re anywhere near something like that with the current technology, I think it’s a dead end, but if there’s even a small possibility of it being true, you want to invest early because the returns will be insane if it pans out. Full blown AGI would revolutionize everything, it would probably be the next industrial revolution after the internet.

      • probably2high@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Look at it in another way, people think this is the start of an actual AI revolution, as in full blown AGI or close to it or something very capable at least

        I think the bigger threat of revolution (and counter-revolution) is that of open source software. For people that don’t know anything about FOSS, they’ve been told for decades now that [XYZ] software is a tool you need and that’s only possible through the innovative and superhuman-like intelligent CEOs helping us with the opportunity to buy it.

        If everyone finds out that they’re actually the ones stifling progress and development, while manipulating markets to further enrich themselves and whatever other partners that align with that goal, it might disrupt the golden goose model. Not to mention defrauding the countless investors that thought they were holding rocket ship money that was actually snake oil.

        All while another country did that collectively and just said, “here, it’s free. You can even take the code and use it how you personally see fit, because if this thing really is that thing, it should be a tool anyone can access. Oh, and all you other companies, your code is garbage btw. Ours runs on a potato by comparison.”

        I’m just saying, the US has already shown they will go to extreme lengths to keep its citizens from thinking too hard about how its economic model might actually be fucking them while the rich guys just move on to the next thing they’ll sell us.

        ETA: a smaller scale example: the development of Wine, and subsequently Proton finally gave PC gamers a choice to move away from Windows if they wanted to.

    • _chris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Education doesn’t make a tech CEO ridiculously wealthy, so there’s no draw for said CEOs to promote the shit out of education.

      Plus educated people tend to ask for more salary. Can’t do that and become a billionaire!

    • FightToAdapt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Because rulling class got high on the promise that they could finally eliminate workers as a cost and be independent from us.

      • TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        They don’t want to get rid of workers because then there would be no consumers. No, they want to increase the downward pressure on wages so they can vacuum up further savings.

        • nomy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          They want you to owe your soul to the company store, to live hand-to-mouth by their largess.

        • FightToAdapt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Why? If you automatize away (regardless of whether it’s feasible or not) all the workers, what’s stop them for cutting them out of the equation? Why can’t they just trade assets between themselves, maintaining a small slave population that does machine maintenance for food and shelter and screwing the rest? Why do you think they still need us if they own both the means for the production as well as labor to produce? That would be a post-labour scarcity economy, available only for the wealthy and with the rest of us left to rot. If you have assets like land, materials, factories you can participate, if you don’t, you can’t

          While I don’t think that this is feasible technologically yet by any means, I think this is what the rich are huffing currently. They want to be independent from us because they are threatened by us.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Because the silicon valley bros had convinced the national security wonks in the Beltway that it was paramount for national security, technological leadership and economic prosperity.

      I think this will go down as the biggest grift in history.

      Kevin Walmsley reported on Deepseek 10 days ago. Last week, the smart money exited big tech. This week the panic starts.

      I’m getting big dot-com 2.0 vibes from all of this.

      https://youtube.com/@inside_china_business

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      For the cost of an education we could end up with smart people who contribute to the economy and society. Instead we are dumping billions into this shit.

      Those are different "we"s.

  • Yeller_king@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So, I get that the hardware is needed for training the models and that’s why the stock price fell. But it’s also required to run the models, and this news is only going to increase the supply of AI services. It seems to me that this isn’t a big threat to the companies that sell AI hardware.

    • sith@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The thing is that they can no longer sell insanely overpriced hardware. The VC fucktards and coin bros begin to understand they’re being scamed. And that murdering competition from China is around the corner. All this is very good news for consumers.

    • magic_lobster_party@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Agree, but the market doesn’t think rationally.

      Better access to software is good for hardware companies. Nvidia is still the best company when it comes to this kind of computing hardware.