this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2026
120 points (89.0% liked)

Technology

83195 readers
3413 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] XLE@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If you read AI critics, you will see people presenting solid financial evidence of the failure of AI companies to do what they promised. Remember Sam Altman promised AGI in 2025? I certainly do, and now so do you.

Do you have any concrete evidence that this financial flop will turn around before it runs out of money?

[–] riskable@programming.dev 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Assume all the big AI firms die: Anthropic, OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, and Meta. Poof! They're gone!

Here would be my reaction: "So anyway... have you tried GLM-7? It's amazing! Also, there's a new workflow in ComfyUI I've been using that works great to generate..."

Generative AI is here to stay. You don't need a trillion dollars worth of data centers for progress to continue. That's just billionaires living in an AGI fantasy land.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I'm sick and tired of AI fans making statements like

Generative AI is here to stay

without evidence.

Citation needed.

[–] riskable@programming.dev 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Um... Where would it go? I've got about 30 models on my machine right now and I download new ones to try out all the time.

Are you suggesting that they'd all just magically disappear one day‽

[–] XLE@piefed.social -1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Where do you think the "new ones" are coming from?

[–] riskable@programming.dev 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Same places as usual: Academia and open source foundations.

That's where 99% of all advancements in AI come from. You don't actually think Big AI is paying as many people to do computer science and mathematics research as all the universities in the world (with computer science programs)?

It's the same shit as always: Big companies commercialize advancements and discoveries made by scientist and researchers from academia (mostly) and give almost nothing back.

Big AI has partnerships with tons of schools and if it weren't for that, they wouldn't be advancing the technology as fast as they are. In fact, the only reason why many of these discoveries are made public at all is because of the agreements with the schools that require the discoveries/papers be published (so their school, professors, researchers, and students can get credit).

Like I was saying before: You don't need a trillion dollars in data centers to do this stuff. Almost all the GPUs and special chips being used (and preordered, sigh) by Big AI are being used to serve their customers (at great expense). Not for training.

Training used to be expensive but so many advancements have been made this is no longer the case. Instead, most of the resources being used in "AI data centers" (and research) is all about making inference more efficient. That's the step that comes after you give an AI a prompt.

Training a super modern AI model can be done with a university's data center or a few hundred thousand to a few million dollars of rented GPUs/compute. It doesn't even take that long!

Generative AI improves at a ridiculously fast rate. In nearly all the ways you could think of: Training, inference (e.g. figuring out user intent), knowledge, understanding, and weirder, fluffier stuff like "creativity" (the benchmarks of which are dubious, BTW).

[–] XLE@piefed.social -1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Before we spin into a tangent about theory and "what ifs" etc, care to link me to all these great models from academics and open-source institutions?

Because right now, the only companies I see making advancements in "AI" are burning through obscene amounts of cash, with no end in sight.

And there is no evidence the cost of inference is going down, and even Anthropic admits training will continue burning resources.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

@ikidd@lemmy.world @ingeanus@ttrpg.network do you two have a source for these supposed great models?

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 41 minutes ago

What inclined you to @ me into this? As far as I can see, I haven't even replied in this thread, and you just seem like you're on the warpath with anyone that wants to defend using LLMs. If Greg KH thinks it's coming into it's own, you might want to heed him.

[–] unpossum@sh.itjust.works -2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)
[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 13 hours ago

Oh wow, comparing a thing to a completely different thing without demonstrating the comparison is valid.

Exactly the non-evidence I expected.

[–] freeman@sh.itjust.works 12 points 21 hours ago

Whether AI can reliably detect issues and generate working code is a whole different thing from CEO's delusions and hyperbole to game the market. Their financial success is also irrelevant, in fact it's better if the sub/token model fails and we are left with locally ran models.