Is the GenAI Bubble Finally Popping?

Offtopic
1

Is the GenAI Bubble Finally Popping? (hpcwire.com)

4 Likes
2

you know, if you don’t want to use these tools, nobody is going to force you

2 Likes
3

That is a relief. :wink:

4
7 Likes
5

We’ve had plenty of topics about AI like this one. Can you please start topics with a bit more substance and more relevant titles?

18 Likes
6

I also wanted to say that I don’t like this practice of dropping links without context, usually that feels like fishing for a quick emotional response from people, not quality discussion. Feels like X is the right venue for this kind of thing, which is why I don’t use it.

9 Likes
7

I think you misunderstand the intent. I aim to provide a quick overview of the press. If there is no discussion whatsoever, that is fine. As long as people look at the original source. (I thought it was an interesting take.)

Edit: Perhaps that we might add a category: “From the press”? “In the news”?
I really don’t see why these kinds of posts should come with a commentary from the poster. People don’t need to know what I think in order to read the original source, do they?

1 Like
8

I don’t think a discussion forum is the right place to start threads without a specified purpose. On Twitter or some subreddits, sharing a link only might fit the vibe, but Discourse is set up for the OP to provide an idea from their perspective for others to respond to. That perspective might be grounded in a link to some new event or recent op ed, but it should have substance on its own.

1 Like
9

You can go against reality for only so long.

LLM technologies produce human-like text that matches the word-sequence statistics extracted from processing large text corpora. Period. Whether the notions and syllogisms expressed in the produced texts match reality is totally accidental. When we accept the reality of the “capabilities” of such tools, we will figure out productive uses. For instance, I find tools like Grammarly and GitHub CoPilot very useful.

2 Likes
10

If you mean “specific” purpose, I believe that my purpose (to inform) is sufficiently specific?

1 Like
11

what did you want us to learn from this article? the author

  1. observes there is a lot of hype
  2. questions (but does not answer) whether that hype is deserved

I think nearly everybody with any experience using or witnessing GenAI has 1. observed the hype and 2. questioned this for themselves (many concluding yes, many concluding no)

so what should we take away besides an emotional reaction predicated on whatever opinion we have already formed based on our own experiences?

1 Like
12

I will not repeat what others have mentioned already, but I want to stress another point.

For what it’s worth, low effort posts like this actually make me hesitant to even look at the source (although the topic is definitely interesting to me).

Mostly because:

  1. I’m not convinced the shared material is worth my time if it doesn’t seem to be worth OPs time to add a few sentences.
  2. I’m fundamentally opposed to the clickbaity direction in which most media is heading…

No offense, just my 2c.

3 Likes
13

Posting links without informative summary is sin. Following such links is also sin. Amen.

1 Like
14

If you want a summary, ask ChatGPT. QED.

1 Like
15

No way! I am walking the true Cthulhu ways. No summary, no clicking spam links.

16

I came here exactly to say this.

17

Respectfully, many of the negative response here are also because this is a Julia forum, so we expect even the Off-topic discussions to be useful to a large portion of Julia users in particular. Many of us happen to consume dairy, but we obviously won’t be trading chocolate milk recipes here. The genAI posts have been more relevant to futurists and investors than Julia developers or users, so it’s not surprising that people here want to move on after a few, especially now that most people already know that genAI has found some users but has fallen short of the adoption touted by tech companies much like VR.

2 Likes
18

ChatGPT has over 180 million monthly users with OpenAI pulling $3.4B

GitHub revenue increased 40% last year almost entirely driven by Copilot subscribers

Anecdotally, pretty much 100% of devs I work with use LLM code assistants in some capacity. Zero use VR

I’m not sure I’d bother to draw an equivalence to VR

3 Likes
19

OpenAI’s annualized revenue is indeed $3.4B, but they’re also expected to lose $5B this year. Tech companies are promising a lot more than helping programmers, and they are betting on genAI becoming profitable in the future by increasing productivity in large swathes of the economy. Comparisons are different inside versus outside bubbles.

3 Likes
20

Let’s take this aside (that I started, sorry!) over to Meta Discussion

1 Like