Some of the devs in my team do this occasionally and it ALWAYS eventually causes issues

Is AI imploding within itself through poisoning and no new content?

Model collapse doesn't retroactively affect models that have already been trained, so this option seems like a pretty nonrigorous belief

Are they putting in their own guardrails to take away the really good innovations because of greed?

This would be difficult and likely counterproductive, but they are known to adjust the amount of compute they allow models to use, so they could be throttling that

AI was never as good as they claimed, even the super advanced models?

Ding ding ding, we have a winner! AI has improved, but those who are selling it will always and forever oversell it, like they would with any product.

Remarkably well said. I don't have much of substance to add, but it is funny to me that:

To get things vaguely working, you need to be relentless in providing a super comprehensive set of requirements and criteria that are impeccable at fully capturing what is needed and could reasonably go wrong.

is basically describing what programming already was.

Idk, the cat is kind of out of the bag here with local open-weights models. Even if all the providers shut down, someone who really wanted an AI could use one of those with not too much effort. A good model would require some impressive hardware, but a bad one is "good enough" for some people.

Yeah, schedenfreud is nice but it is not a filling meal. Seeing AI addicts get taken advantage of can make me smug but it cannot make me happy. People are still being exploited.

i know a person that is addicted to it, use it to do every job searching, resume, his other personal problems.

on ASSUMPTIONS, that dint have a viable product before hand.

wouldnt it be more useful for them to bet on gop, who will be forced to bail out, more likely to. with Ds, its wishy washy.

more like financial cannibalization in favor of the AI hype, sacrifice all your other business ventures, or employees for AI.

i know a pro-slop in my immediate family, he would refer to chat gpt as a way to solve whatever question he was having.

they are keeping the grift going as long as possible,

They are profitable on inference (at least anthropic). Inference is cheap, it’s not susbsidized. It’s training that’s expensive, but if the bubble really does pop then current open source models (which are pretty much sold at inference rate + small margin) will actually go down in price since the cost of hardware will have gone down (assuming less demand for GPUs). Considering that the current best open model is roughly one month behind, we won’t revert to pre-ai anywhere. It’s just too cheap for that.

Still, it’s lovely seeing people spreading misinformation based on something they saw on tiktok years ago. Keep up with the times or don’t spread outdated info.

No. No? You kidding?

The grift that keeps on grifting

That's not how shares work at all!

You can't turn them into the company at market value, you have to sell it to other people to cash out. The only time a company buys its shares is when they do a buyback, but that wouldn't be a debt on the balance sheet.

The shareholders are just the company owners.

As a former quality person this is everywhere. Manufacturing has basically relegated QA/QO to be task based (reactive, paper pushing, etc) and removed from the process completely unless deviations occur (which they do all the time, go figure).

The further you are from the product the less value you have.

I have removed every dollar of my money from anything that is directly involved with AI.

Well the description is literally what is behind the $72 billion reported loss

I'm not talking about personal use.

Yeah. That $80 billion loss was all for training I guess 🙄

That's next level FAFO

Robots, flying cars, quantumAI, Epstein Files...

If the banks desperately want to sell you something, you know it must smell fishy.

They want to get the growing risk out of their portfolios, and when other banks and investors don't want to take it, they try to find idiots in the masses instead. In Germany, they had the word "Volksaktie" (shares for the common people) for it, and yes, it was about the same, even though back then there still was some substance behind it, and not just greed and unfulfilled contracts like with the AI bubble.

You know, when I paid 2k for a graphics card during the shortage. Maybe that was a good indicator that building giant warehouses using expensive and hard to make components was probably not the best course of action.

Oh musk did that one already. That’s why he has helpers ;)

I’m pretty sure the earth will expel us long before AI has a chance to do it. 😭🔥

In case you weren't being sarcastic: Yes, that's a direct quote from the Paedophile traitor, the Fuhrer in Orange, shitlord of Hamberder.

He claimed that the only reason america had COVID cases to report was because we were testing for them, stating directly that testing was bad for publicity.

Wow.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

If shit rolls downhill QA is at the bottom and I'm saying this as someone who comes from Ops. I deal with the shit when it hits production.

Truth of the matter is in any org it goes like this

Devs - literally walk on water. Give us new and shiny things

Ops - support the half baked shit that devs promote to prod on lies that "it's production ready we will fix in future sprints"

QA - magical role that is never filled because "we can just get devs to review their own code"

I was ready to type "just fire QA and have the LLM do it" then I read the last paragraph.

I'm hoping this is the line that executives won't cross

Hate to be a downer here buuuut....

I've never known QA evaluations to be design-based, only results-based. They would test each of the cases and reject the code if it failed any of them, but they wouldn't check for or reject the code just because it was handling them in stupid, non-generalized ways.

Checking for bad design is more of a team lead code reviewer thing (if it happens at all).

AI is the new COBOL.

An $80 billion loss so far. That was only for the first half of the year!

Because the hyperscaler cartel is dumping cloud AI below cost, while simultaneously buying up essentially all the RAM, in order to deliberately and artificially destroy the local AI market.

It's not exactly $80 billion, $72 billion of that loss is accounting for the rising valuation giving early investors larger paybacks, aka Google and Amazon. The same people who give Anthropic its compute, at a very very healthy discount, are the ones who benefit most from a high valuation.

Ok, why do you expect providers wouldn't use cheap open models if they can't sell the expensive ones?

That’s unfortunate. But less unfortunate than it could be.

The problem with pure vibecoding is that it can get really flashy results up front, just enough to impress and get green lights. But it’s completely unsustainable outside the simplest projects. At some point, vibecoded stuff gets issues, or one realizes certain features actually aren’t working, and no one can fix them.

In other words, it’s great that QA is already catching the issues. Because they could have quite possibly vibecoded something functional, passed through QA, and ended your separate effort, only for it to collapse later.

Note that I am strictly talking vibecoding, though. I know it’s not a popular opinion in this sub, but more mundane LLM “chore automation” is far more practical.

Not sarcastic: aghast. It's so hard to know reality from the Onion.

Covid kind of exposed how he operates.

His problem was that the virus did not pay attention to the media or care about politics.

That addiction made me wonder. Is it possible that AI was secretly used for disinformation on social media? I see some similarities.

Way back in the oughties I worked on a consumer electronics project where our QA guy actually used the product, would come to design reviews, and filed bugs about the UI design confusing the user.

It was awesome, so of course that job got eliminated as soon as possible.

Moron downplayed it because he thought it would hurt his reelection chances. If he had leaned into COVID and mad a huge public commitment to fight it he would have sailed right back into office.

I would still call the user-facing look and feel of the UI more of a "result" in the sense I'm using it, though. When I said "design" I was really talking about the internal implementation that someone not looking at the source code would never experience.

It doesn't necessarily hurt for QA people to have access to the source code, but they shouldn't need it to do their job.

Well that and the fact that they have a company to run and people to pay. Do you seriously believe inference is not profitable, despite evidence to the contrary being everywhere you look?

Lot of similarities, but add the "have to worry that code will be written toward an end that was not asked for as a side effect". Not just what side effects the code might have, but unrelated code might also do.