this post was submitted on 26 May 2026
235 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

84961 readers
4624 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Spoiler: no

top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 hours ago

Very difficult project to track data for. Major difficulty is that capex budgets are like share buyback budgets. Implementation speed subject to change. It's hard to measure revenue/profitability because AI credits tend to be bonus perks for enterprise customers, and in Meta's case they use it for better brainwashing/ad revenue.

The best way to measure Bubbliciousness is trends in spot GPU rentals. Nvidia has been selling more datacenter GPUs than datacenters completion for over 1 year. Those GPUs filter down to tier 2 providers because they cost $1.30 to $2.70 per hour to just sit in a warehouse. Anthropic's deal to replace grok at Colossus 1 has significantly reduced tier 2 provider usage, and those spot rates have collapsed below their runcosts. https://lemmy.ca/comment/23443450

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 3 points 12 hours ago

"AI: The New and Improved Snake Oil. Will cure what ails you. Trust me."

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 5 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

For the scammers,, yes. Not for anyone else.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 10 points 18 hours ago

Worry not, massive layoffs coming to the rescue of those balance sheets.

[–] nosuchanon@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

It doesn’t need to be profitable so long as the government contracts for surveillance of the entire world population fund AI.

IT WAS NEVER GOING TO BE FOR THE MASSES TO IMPROVE THEMSELVES. THEY COULD GIVE A SHIT LESS ABOUT YOU AND ME.

[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 4 points 11 hours ago

Yeah, 3,000 data centers aren’t being built in the U.S. to generate profits from slop. They’re infrastructure for the digital cage.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 36 points 1 day ago (4 children)

For hardware manufacturers like Nvidia: Massively.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 hours ago

not really, they are not getting paid cash, just stakes in AI companies.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 6 points 20 hours ago

They're the ones selling shovels during the gold rush

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 day ago

Yeah, companies are making money from AI, but AI isn't making money... Yet

[–] VibeSurgeon@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago

As noted in the post

[–] theherk@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago

That nvidia one is probably impossible to pin down, since it is really just a big ouroboros investment human centipede eating its own revenue out of all the other asses.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They barely have launched anything and they are already enshitifying their offerings. I think this says what everyone is thinking. No, they are nowhere near profitable and large scale deployment may not be profitable for a long time.

It took AWS nine years to become profitable. It appears that AI may take a decade or more. How they plan on surviving when they are already taking away features and putting hard limits on usage is anybody's guess.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago

AWS wasn't profitable because they were reiinvesting all their revenue back into growing the service. If they chose to stop growing, they could have been profitable at any point.

AI as an industry is actively, violently unprofitable. They can't even afford to keep the lights on without torching investor money. The more they grow, the faster they lose money.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not just that… I’m suspicious that some of them are already implementing inference inefficiencies because they profit more from inference. So if you can make someone’s question consume more tokens, you earn more income per query.

Edit: found example conversation here https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/14593#issuecomment-4523777147

[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This, and https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/ give me real hope for our Internet to come back someday.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Chulk@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'll never understand how devs get so confident in their product that they will provoke hackers/attackers. I wouldn't even have that level of confidence even after an independent audit lmao

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 4 points 21 hours ago

It's like people sending their locks to Lock Picking Lawyer hoping for cheap advertising.

[–] magnue@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago

Assumedly Nvidia is just dumping all its profits back into these companies

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I really thought today would be the day guys

I guess I just need to invest more into AI. What if we took the funding for hospitals and converted them into diesel generators to power more chips bought for well above cost?

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Can we feed small children into the diesel generators?

[–] SillyMe@piefed.social 2 points 22 hours ago

with ~~block chain~~ AI all things are possible

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think that would cannibalize labour from the coal mines.

We could do the elderly though.

[–] muse@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago

HypnoDrones released, currency now irrelevant

[–] areakode@riskeratspizza.com 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I think they're hoping AI will eventually get smart enough to make itself do stuff. Sorta like a fusion reactor: you get it jump started with billions of taxpayer money, and eventually it will start spitting out hundred dollar bills!

  • Step 1: Destroy the environment with millions of unnecessary datacenters.
  • Step 2: ???
  • Step 3: Profit!
[–] Flower@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago

Step 2: after the bubble pops buy everything for pennies on the dollar. repurpose AI and datacenters for extremely invasive surveillance network and sell data and services to totalitarian governments

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Dude, just buy a printer! /j

[–] Eternal192@anarchist.nexus 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The only thing about AI that interests me is when are we going to make it go away?

[–] village604@adultswim.fan -1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

It's not going anywhere, unfortunately.

[–] Eternal192@anarchist.nexus 1 points 12 hours ago

It is, you're right but that's as long as those that are in charge of spreading this virus are alive.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

This seems somewhat misleading. Lots of products take a lot of investment in them for many years before they reach profitability. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, for example, was in development for 7 years and another three years after that before it was profitable. The Falcon 9 rocket took 13 years to develop and now it's the most profitable satellite launcher around. The Dyson bag-free cyclonic vacuum cleaner took 15 years to develop.

Most of this AI stuff has only been in heavy development since ChatGPT burst upon the scene in 2023. It's not unreasonable to see the industry still heavily into the investment and development side of things.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago

The Dyson bag-free cyclonic vacuum cleaner took 15 years to develop.

Ya know those are overpriced shit, right?

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, for example, was in development for 7 years and another three years after that before it was profitable.

Ya know those are overpriced shit, right?

[–] Badabinski@kbin.earth 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Building a jet doesn't require over a trillion dollars of capex, and selling jets is profitable. There's solid evidence that inference isn't profitable, and the AI labs need inference to be extremely profitable if they're going to meet their absolutely ludicrous contractual performance targets. Oracle is expecting hundreds of billions of dollars from OpenAI by like 2030. That shit is not happening.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago

Whether inference is profitable or not is not a global yes/no question. It depends heavily on the circumstances, what you're using it for and what you're charging for it. A lot of the money being invested in research right now is going into making inference cheaper, which would of course make it more profitable to sell at current price points. Or just run it yourself, local models are getting quite capable these days.

I wouldn't bet on any specific company being the ones to survive this, especially not first-movers like OpenAI. More likely they'll spend their money blazing the trail and the ones to profit from it will be the ones who followed along behind. When a company goes bankrupt it doesn't poof out of existence, its assets get sold off at pennies on the dollar and then whoever bought those assets gets a chance at running them without the overhead of the previous company's debt.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

That's true but the pricing doesn't match the expense by a long shot. The question is - what is going to give out first? Capital, or the all-you-can-eat pricing? (and yes the latter is closing as we speak)