this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2026
638 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

85208 readers
4757 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Folstar@lemmus.org 8 points 8 hours ago

I'm excited to see the PE Ratios after these IPOs. We're already well into dot.com absurdity, but throw in some multi-trillion market caps with negative earnings?

[–] TwinTitans@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Times running out? No, it’s out.

[–] Entertainmeonly@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Even the street corner hustler knows you give the first rock out for free.

[–] BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.ca 22 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

They also know not to spend trillions making the product.

Hey, cocaine and baking soda ain't cheap you know. Plus you got to have a microwave and shit. Overhead is crazy like that.

/s

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 22 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Really? Has anyone mentioned that to Tesla? Or to whoever is in the government that keeps giving him billion dollar contracts?

[–] tefbo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

Agree with the sentiment. It's not like we are not in a bubble, but the old fashioned business and growth of the 20th century is gone. With technology things scale incredibly so winning the market share can put you on top for decades, and not just with finances. At this point the power and control of information means everything

[–] BioDriver@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Oh you mean the Tesla with a PE Ratio of 382 (20 times the industry average), a PEG of 16, P/B to 18, massive insider stock dumps, and is still down YTD? Tesla still has power because of their stranglehold on charging. AI companies have insane costs and people souring on them as they either lose their jobs or see their companies’ costs go up as a result, all without solid ROIs and strong buyers remorse.

And Trump/Hegseth keep giving them contracts because they’re idiots

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

And Trump/Hegseth keep giving them contracts because they’re idiots

Ironically, Trump said the same thing about Biden.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 23 points 22 hours ago

Is the real hope that AI will be a subscription service? Those subscription billionaires ain't got a clue. Let's change "At some point you've got to make money" to "At some point you've got to add value".

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 46 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think those IPOs are meant to bring in enough money to give the founders and managers golden parachutes before the whole system folds.

They don't make any money - on the contrary - and they won't miraculously start making it just because the IPO happened.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 18 points 22 hours ago

You're thinking too long term. IPOs are the C suite cashing out.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 40 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Here's the problem... He says AI was adopted beyond his expectations. Great.

But if somebody is using it at the current price point of super cheap or free, are they going to keep using it when it gets expensive?

You can make a basic chatbot run on a desktop PC, but nobody wants to pay for that. Once you get into things with useful generation and large context windows, or things like video generation, suddenly you need one or more $10,000+ pieces of hardware to run it. So the $10 a month you charge the user is basically an introductory price that doesn't cover your hardware fees let alone the software engineers to build your AI.

Eventually, the bill comes due. Eventually, you have to look at your customers and how much machine time they use each month and how much your r&d costs and figure out what the actual cost to the customer has to be. And then the customer rethinks how useful the AI is or isn't.

People will pay $10 a month for chat GPT to write their emails. Will they pay $100 a month?

What about the company that replaced all their software developers with AI. Suddenly the AI cost as much or more as the software developers. Only now the developers who understood the code base work for other companies.

There will be a fun correction when this happens.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 10 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Once you get into things with useful generation and large context windows, or things like video generation, suddenly you need one or more $10,000+ pieces of hardware to run it.

A Blackwell server with 72 GPUs costs about $3 million, plus requires 130 kW of power (about 3 residential homes' max rated power through a residential 200A circuit box, for about $600-$1000/day in electricity cost).

You're gonna need to sell a lot of $20/month subscriptions to get that paid for, assuming that the server is good for 5 years. If it's only good for 3 years, the economics are basically impossible.

[–] grinde@sh.itjust.works 12 points 17 hours ago

... assuming that the server is good for 5 years. If it's only good for 3 years, the economics are basically impossible.

And surely the big AI companies wouldn't decide that hardware rated for ~3 years should be amortized over 5-6 years in order to massively inflate their value on paper.

Surely.

[–] NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca 11 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

I am no AI fan, but I do not see this going away. I think if you can get enough people addicted, they will pay costs if the costs seem nominal at first.

If someone can’t write well and has an upcoming deadline for an essay or needs to write an important document, they might use a one-time fee. If someone uses it for day-to-day decision making, they will certainly do a subscription if it seems cheap at first. And once you have those people expecting to pay, the price keeps increasing every couple of years.

Example a - Facebook. Rolled out as an entirely free service and enrolled billions of members. Now enough people pay for extras in things as stupid as Candy Crush that they can tack millions onto their revenue for nearly no benefit provider. If enough people pay $1 for something stupid, it pays off

Example b - Prime streaming services. It was a free tack-on to people with Prime memberships. So people bought Fire sticks and use it as a home base. And now they are so cemented into the system and don’t know how to use an alternative so they will pay for 1) extra apps that will show the program they want, which will pay Amazon a fee and 2) pay extra for no ads now that they are addicted

I also have no doubt that advertising can be baked into AI. Just wait until it writes a pathology report and recommends a certain brand name medication, or gives someone a to-do list for hosting a Christmas party with specific brands and desired trends listed.

As for video generation, I think you have a small enough pool that does this anyway, and this will increasingly be consolidated by price towards a handful of powerful individuals who want to sway public influence.

You and I may not pay for it, but have no doubt you can get similar adoption to streaming services and you can get people to pay for anything if it feels cheap enough to be nothing money. I’ve become a cynical old fart and I’ve watched this song and dance too many times.

[–] architect@thelemmy.club 1 points 4 hours ago

Advertising is already baked into AI. There just need to switch it in fully. That’s coming.

[–] nickiwest@lemmy.world 19 points 22 hours ago (7 children)

I think the price point is where your theory falls apart. The AI companies are spending far more than Netflix and they will need to charge more than the average family can afford in order to turn a profit. (Especially in the US where people are struggling to pay for gas and groceries right now.)

Take a look at the new token-based business services. People are blowing through their monthly allotment in a couple of days doing the same things they had been doing previously. Businesses won't be able to afford increasing their AI spending by 10x to keep up.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Mondez@lemdro.id 6 points 23 hours ago

On the code development front it's even worse as now you have an unpredictable cost based on token consumption rather than the predictable cost of a salary and have no leverage to negotiate the cost.

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People will pay $10 a month for chat GPT to write their emails.

They won't even pay that in many cases but instead rely on the free offerings. Expect those to go away altogether, to be heavily hamstring, or to become absolutely riddled with advertisements.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If run locally you get none of those problems.

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 1 points 8 hours ago

Right, but then we are back to the question of how these companies are supposed to make money. I suppose hardware manufacturers will be okay with this outcome but I'm not sure how these heavily inflated software companies will profit under a local first world. So we are back to the bubble deflating or bursting.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago
[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

wow these guys seem to hate it all of a sudden, what changed...

[–] ziggurat@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

They road the wave up, now they are wanting to exit before it crashes

[–] Phantaloons@piefed.zip 51 points 1 day ago (8 children)

ERROR: Capitalism has no idea how to deal with this situation.

I'm actually kinda fascinated with how this will shake out. This isn't like one or two companies making a bet. The entire S&P500 is pushing Ai.

Well, here's hoping a few investors do a flip before they hit the pavement.

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago

ERROR: Capitalism has no idea how to deal with this situation.

Actually it does. Bad decisions can be made only until money runs out

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is capitalism working exactly as intended. People with capital are using it to guide businesses to make them more money.

The mistake is thinking that capitalism is motivated by a healthy economy, when the theory is that if everyone is aggressively selfish then the economy will naturally become healthy and efficient.

The people making money are counting on making their money as investors keep pumping more in. The investors are all aiming to be the last one to sell before the crash. Russian roulette venture capitalism. (In some cases they think the economy will tolerate 1-2 companies and they're aiming to buy a controlling interest in a company worth 2% current value after the correction, and in others they just have so much money that a few billion is a minor bet - BlackRock comes to mind, with more than $10 trillion to invest)

If you look at 2008, we had a similar-ish situation with a major portion of the economy being invested in mortgage based investments.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] magnue@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Come on now, Nvidia is making money. Nvidia then just gives it back to them to make more money is all.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah, Nvidia invests in Open AI, Open AI uses that money to buy Nvidia chips. More people invest in Nvidia because it's revenue keeps growing.

Charles Ponzi would be proud.

[–] SaraTonin@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Alan and Beth, two economists are walking through some woods. They come across s pile of shit and Alan says to Beth “if you eat that shot I’ll give you a tenner”

“Okay,” says Beth. She eats the shit and Alan hands her a £10 note

They walk on for a bit and find another pile of shit. Beth says to Alan “now I’ll give you a tenner of you eat that pile of shit”

“Okay,” says Alan. He eats the shit and Beth hands the £10 note back to him

They walk on a bit further and Beth says “you know, it seems to me like we both just ate a pile of shit and nobody gained anything”

“Ah, that’s where you’re wrong,” says Alan “we’ve increased the GDP by £20”

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Isn't this just the broken window fallacy but with a poop fetish?

[–] SaraTonin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Not quite. The point of the broken window fallacy is that had the money not been spent on the window, it would have been spent on something else. So breaking a window does generate revenue, but not necessarily more than not breaking a window

Whatever happens, the shopkeeper is in a worse position than he otherwise was

Here the point is that they’re passing the money back and forth. That’s like the AI companies right now - passing money round in a circle and that being presented as if it were the same thing as the industry as a whole making money

NVidia gives money to OpenAI, who give it to another company to build datacentres, who give it back to NVidia and NVidia’s Number Goes Up

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 day ago

Wasn't his full name Charles Ponzi-Scheme?

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 63 points 1 day ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] OldQWERTYbastard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 91 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I want to see everyone hop on the IPOs and ride them all the way down to the floor!

Fuck AI

[–] cmbabul@slrpnk.net 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If I wasn’t convinced the entire financial system was fraudulent I would be shorting the fuck out of all of them

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

"The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent"

[–] redditmademedoit@piefed.zip 8 points 23 hours ago

We'll burn more and more coal to power air conditioners to deal with unbearable global warming until that's no longer possible.

The financial markets are the same. No reasonable person believes any of this is sane or sustainable. But what happens when the music stops? Very few chairs.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Especially since Nvidia has reached the "too big to fail" level; guess who's gonna pay again for the upcoming crisis?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›