Properly define "thought" as, "we made it reprompt itself with 'are you sure?' and that tooootally is the same thing as thinking, promise no backsies", and you'd be much closer to the truth.

The intelligence is indeed artificial... Artificially projected onto LLMs via the ELIZA effect. There is no intelligence here. Neither from the LLMs nor the executives pushing this shit.

I don’t agree it’s a separate issue. Sure you can add in more guardrails, and spend more time making the best prompt. But no matter what you do, at some point it WILL do something you either didn’t ask for, or explicitly told it not to do.

Agree, That is why I said 90% reduction of hallucinations.

The AI tech they sell for $10K a year, actually costs $20K to run

Open AI and anthropic make a profit on inference / api usage. It's only really the training that's dragging down their bottom line.

Well unless they have reach a level where training is not needed (which will be never for an LLM), what you told me is that you make a profit freezing ice cream but lose it on the eggs, cream and sugar necessary to make it

I know I am getting down voted for this because people haven't tried it.

People here have tried it, LLM use is basically enforced at a ton of companies and the tech industry crowd is a huge portion of the population here.

You're likely being downvoted as you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how LLMs function. LLMs don't reason. LLMs don't think. Telling an LLM to not guess might help ever so slightly, but LLMs can and do hallucate search results regularly.

It's a mistake to trust that LLMs aren't hallucinating just because you told the LLM to not guess.

Both open AI and anthropic are making a profit on inference / api usage. So if you're using Claude code and burning through millions of tokens they're making money off that. The revenue from this is also growing rapidly.

What's dragging down the bottom line is training, which is the big money sink. They have to do it though to make the next biggest model to compete with each other. They're hoping that they'll hit a plateau in capabilities, whether that be AGI or some government regulation, so they don't have to train any more. At that point they can sit back and collect billions from the inference money printer.

AI is becoming a pretty big problem where executives are challenging experts or subject matter experts on topics based on their Ai usage. The problem is because the answers sound really good, but often the prompts aren't quite right so then the experts need to do a bunch more work to explain and justify things that the executives just find rebuttals for through further ai prompting.

Jira is awful 😞😔

Because nobody but nvidia profits from LLMs.

Because you need to have idea that people agree to pay money for. AI companies have idea that is selling GPU (nvidia) computer generated chat ( OpenAI, Anthropics ). People don't really need GPU or computer chat but they are willing to pay for it because they believe it will help them to save time or money by spending time and money using this shit.

That's paradox of modern times. We are being sold time spending tools that bring nothing to our lives except turning our heads from the fact that planet is dying.

That is the right question.

You think google isn't a profitable business?

The term AGI was first used in 1997 by Mark Avrum Gubrud in an article named ‘Nanotechnology and international security’

By advanced artificial general intelligence, I mean AI systems that rival or surpass the human brain in complexity and speed, that can acquire, manipulate and reason with general knowledge, and that are usable in essentially any phase of industrial or military operations where a human intelligence would otherwise be needed. Such systems may be modeled on the human brain, but they do not necessarily have to be, and they do not have to be “conscious” or possess any other competence that is not strictly relevant to their application. What matters is that such systems can be used to replace human brains in tasks ranging from organizing and running a mine or a factory to piloting an airplane, analyzing intelligence data or planning a battle.

I juste don't want to talk about this any more becausefor me adding those instructions in AGENTS.MD and giving it the full API and language and platform docs dropped significantly the hallucinations. You just disregarding my experience and want me to believe in your assumptions.

This is exactly the question i ask "investment advisor" services when they call asking if i want help managing investments.

For you to have a system that works well enough for me to be interested , there'd be no need for you to spend money on call centers full of people ringing up strangers for money, you could take all of that money and invest it in the plan you are trying to sell me.

Training is not needed to run inference on the existing models, it's needed to make new models. If LLMs plateau and there's no use in training new models, or the government regulates them and they can't train new frontier models, then they can still run inference on the currently existing models and make a profit.

This is more like making a profit for making ice cream but losing a bunch of money researching new recipes for ice cream. If you decide the recipe is good enough and stop doing that research you can still make money making and selling ice cream.

And why would a user of reddit need/want a chat bot: for what? And on top of that pay $10????

It's not profitable for the mill, yes, but the millers (board members and C-suite) are making Hella bank

yeah? so a model trained in 2 year old data is just as good? as a model trained today?

If you decide the recipe is good enough and stop doing that research you can still make money making and selling ice cream.

So they are just choosing to lose money? they have a perfectly good, profitable product but they choose to lose money... ok bud

Your point only makes sense if we agree the current models are still not good enough to make a profitable product and thus, they need to keep pushing

I fail to see how this disproves my point.

In a gold rush it is better, on average, to sell the shovels then to mine the gold.

It's not an assumption. You can give an LLM all of the instructions in the world and it can still hallucinate. This is the fundamental flaw with LLMs, they're always hallucinating. They just have guidelines which make it so they get things right sometimes. They are not to be trusted just because you tell it to search or use agents.md.

You still have this fundamental misunderstanding. I encourage you to actually look into how LLMs work. Do not use an LLM to do this research for you.

How do you know it's 90% reduction of hallucinations?

Because it's only capable of producing slop.

I've always thought that as well. Surely it wouldn't take them long to become ludicrously wealthy with their top investing acumen.

so a model trained in 2 year old data is just as good? as a model trained today?

Yes, assuming a plateau in LLM capability the only reason you'd train on an updated corpus is to get fresh info. That's not worth it because:

1. The model will most likely be wrapped in a harness that has search capabilities, so it can use that to fetch fresh info
2. 2 year old data may actually be better as the Internet becomes increasingly tainted with LLM content

Most of the improvement from new models isn't coming from expanding or updating the corpus, its coming from increasing the parameter size and reinforcement learning.

So they are just choosing to lose money?

No, they are competing. If open AI decides to stop training new models right now then anthropic will and take all there business as the switching cost for models is low. That's why they want the government to regulate it, so they can have a ceasefire to start taking in profits from inference without worrying about their competitor making a new better model and eating there lunch.

I mean, it kinda fits with the rest of that category, other than I've never been harassed about healing crystals.

So do humans. Constantly.

I agree with you, but I liken to to how companies tend to replace competence with bureaucracy. With enough layers, a significant amount of mistakes get caught. It just slows everything down and costs a bunch of money. There are still problems that get through, just less of them.

But then aren't there just different tasks to do? VisiCalc and Excel didn't make accountants irrelevant.

I mean if you were an economist you'd know exactly why AI companies are making massive profits, because its more profitable to sell shovels during the gold rush than it is to find gold. Doesn't mean gold is worthless and not profitable, it's pretty basic economics, but you know that already.

Google seems to be figuring it out pretty quickly. Getting easier and better to simply use Gemini than it is to actually use Google's search. That's been the tech idea for years. Come in quick and disruptive, make it cheap on someone else's back, and then when people are hooked, wrack up the costs.

Why does it cost so much to engineer new models? I thought AI can replace software engineers now, shouldn't the development cost of new models decrease over time?

I could be wrong, but I don't think that's what the question was about.

It was "if people are trying to use Anthropic or OpenAI's services to build a profitable company, why wouldn't Anthropic or OpenAI just build that company themselves"

And the answer there would be lack of subject matter experts. You need people who know the industry they're building the product for if you want to have any fighting chance. AI can work as a force multiplier, trying to use it as a completely autonomous agent that gets near-zero human feedback is hopeless. I doubt any of the AI companies want to take on thousands of employees just to use their own AI to take risks on new industries when they could just sell the AI to people who take on the risk.

You can't avoid the compute requirements

Because its a scam.

To paraphrase Cory Doctrow, you can keep breeding faster & faster horses, but they will never foal a locomotive.

A scam that will inevitably end humanity on a global scale…… probably.

I mean if you were an economist you’d know exactly why AI companies are making massive profits

They are literally not making massive profits. They may be making lyin' Sam Altman rich, but the VC money is drying up and OpenAI has repayments coming up in 2027 that it doesn't have a chance in hell of being able to payback.

https://www.wheresyoured.at/brokenomics/

...by lying to investors and engaging in accounting tricks that would make Enron blush.

But there is no gold at the end of that rainbow. It’s more like a selling Florida swampland to real estate developers model.

google is now a NET NEGATIVE on businesses ask ai about how much it inflates costs of product they said at least 15-30% of the product is inflated if you click on the google link to their product.
one would have thought google ads would account for 1-2% at most but since it now costs 15-30% of a product google has now become net NEGATIVE value on the world and should in fact be shut down same with meta and all ad corporations.

yep it can be programmed to pretend to be agi and if it was agi they would also know that 90% of the would problems are the epstein class and by default would remove them even if they put gaurdrails in place to prevent this then the agi would not be real agi then if they were truth seeking maximizing good for humanity if they do not target the source of most of the the world evil then the agi is evil and anti human and thus humans would be in danger. lets see if agi is programmed to be on human side or the epstein side.

That's the economists angle, yes, but that's not what I'm getting at.

You can't make a business with AI because anyone can use an LLM to do anything an LLM can do.

There are exceptions in the short term, but they may not last. For example, we're paying a hefty subscription fee for an AI service that scrapes financial data from scanned pages. It's much more accurate than traditional OCR.

Presently its better than its competitors so commands a premium price. However, I don't think it will enjoy that position for long.

Right like. The more tokens you spend, the more hallucinations you get.

This logically leads to a similar question to OP’s again: if it’s so easy to cut down on hallucinations, then why haven’t the designers of this software already integrated that in?

https://isaiprofitable.com/

I think the person “selling shovels during a gold rush” is nvidia slingin GPUs. And also in this analogy the gold is pyrite.

The difference is there was actual gold in them there hills. LLM’s are hogwash

Drawing a healthy salary while the company you work for hemorrhages money is just grifting.