You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
4 points

AI was 99% a fad. Besides OpenAI and Nvidia, none of the other corporations bullshitting about AI have made anything remotely useful using it.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Nvidia made money, but I’ve not seen OpenAI do anything useful, and they are not even profitable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

ChatGPT is basically the best LLM of its kind. As for Nvidia I’m not talking about hardware I’m talking about all of the models it’s trained to do everything from DLSS and ACE to creating virtual characters that can converse and respond naturally to a human being.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Absolutely not true. Disclaimer, I do work for NVIDIA as a forward deployed AI Engineer/Solutions Architect—meaning I don’t build AI software internally for NVIDIA but I embed with their customers’ engineering teams to help them build their AI software and deploy and run their models on NVIDIA hardware and software. edit: any opinions stated are solely my own, N has a PR office to state any official company opinions.

To state this as simply as possible: I wouldn’t have a job if our customers weren’t seeing tremendous benefit from AI technology. The companies I work with typically are very sensitive to CapX and OpX costs of AI—they self-serve in private clouds. If it doesn’t help them make money (revenue growth) or save money (efficiency), then it’s gone—and so am I. I’ve seen it happen; entire engineering teams laid off because a technology just couldn’t be implemented in a cost-effective way.

LLMs are a small subset of AI and Accelerated-Compute workflows in general.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

To state this as simply as possible: I wouldn’t have a job if our customers weren’t seeing tremendous benefit from AI technology.

Right because corporate management doesn’t ever blindly and stupidly overinvest in fads that blow up in their faces…

I work with typically are very sensitive to CapX and OpX costs of AI—they self-serve in private clouds. If it doesn’t help them make money (revenue growth) or save money (efficiency), then it’s gone—and so am I.

You clearly have no clue what you’re on about. As someone with a degrees and experience in both CS and Finance all I have to say is that’s not at all how these things work. Plenty of companies lose money on these things in the hopes that their FP&A projection fever dreams will come true. And they’re wrong much more often than you seem to think. FP&A is more art than science and you can get financial models to support any argument you want to make to convince management to keep investing in what you think they should. And plenty of CEOs and boards are stupid enough to buy it. A lot of the AI hype has been bought and sold that way in the hopes that it would be worthwhile eventually or that other alternatives can’t be just as good or better.

I’ve seen it happen; entire engineering teams laid off because a technology just couldn’t be implemented in a cost-effective way.

This is usually what happens once they finally realize spending money on hype doesn’t pay off and go back to more established business analytics, operations research, and conventional software which never makes mistakes if it’s programmed correctly.

LLMs are a small subset of AI and Accelerated-Compute workflows in general.

No one ever said otherwise. And we’re talking about AI only, no moving the goalposts to accelerated computing, which is a mechanism through which to implement a wide range of solutions and not a specific one in and of itself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That’s fair. I see what I see at an engineering and architecture level. You see what you see at the business level.

That said. I stand by my statement because I and most of my colleagues in similar roles get continued, repeated and expanded-scope engagements. Definitely in LLMs and genAI in general especially over the last 3-5 years or so, but definitely not just in LLMs.

“AI” is an incredibly wide and deep field; much more so than the common perception of what it is and does.

Perhaps I’m just not as jaded in my tech career.

operations research, and conventional software which never makes mistakes if it’s programmed correctly.

Now this is where I push back. I spent the first decade of my tech career doing ops research/industrial engineering (in parallel with process engineering). You’d shit a brick if you knew how much “fudge-factoring” and “completely disconnected from reality—aka we have no fucking clue” assumptions go into the “conventional” models that inform supply-chain analytics, business process engineering, etc. To state that they “never make mistakes” is laughable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I would say LLMs specifically are in that ball park. Things like machine vision have been boringly productive and relatively un hyped.

There’s certainly some utility to LLMs, but it’s hard to see through all the crazy over estimations and being shoved everywhere by grifters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

lalal AI has made some great innovations in taking songs and separating them into vocals and instrumentals. that’s a game changer for remix artists.

other than that niche utility and a handful of others, AI is largely bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

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


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.7K

    Posts

  • 153K

    Comments