Some of the “older people” were around in the dot com bubble. It’s not that we think there’s no future for it (the internet didn’t go away after the dot com bubble burst) it’s that it’s currently unreliable tech. I use it all the time, but I’m not going to put significant effort into integrating it into my workflow until after the bubble bursts. The costs are currently being subsidized by a ridiculous amount of investment dollars so we don’t actually know what the price tag will be when they need to make a profit to make a return on the investment. Currently AI is in a similar place to companies like AOL were in the dot com bubble when you look at the finances of this thing.
Also be aware that fraud has been effectively decriminalized in the US. There are no consequences for lying to investors now. And they are lying. The statement that “software development has been solved” is a lie. Some of us know about the Halting Problem and know that statements like that are mathematically false.
After the bubble bursts, the tech will become more reasonable. We’ll have actual prices so we can assess where the tech is worthwhile to use and where it’s too expensive to use. Choosing where to use an algorithm and where not to use an algorithm is what software engineering has always been about, so it’s not exactly a game changer.
In the meantime, yeah I use the investor subsidized service, because why not use something someone else is paying for? It gives me an idea of which problems it’s suitable for and which problems it’s not good for. When there’s actually real prices to the tech I’ll know everything I need to know to be able to make more permanent implementations of the tech. But I know from experience that it’s a bad idea to become dependent on tech before you know what the price tag will be.
It’s kind of an Iceland situation. In Iceland there was a massive influx of money from hedge fund operations. Fishermen became bankers. Then 2008 happened, and the bankers had to go back to being fishermen again. The lesson is, when there’s amounts of money that doesn’t even make sense being thrown around, it’s a good idea to still maintain your fishing boats and nets.
It is certainly true that AI is in a bubble, alongside the (false) economy. I just have a feeling that people are deluding themselves into thinking AI is useless and undesirable to society, and by doing so, are robbing themselves and the better parts of society the opportunity to steer the future.
Your measured approach is an appropriate response. Familiarity with the technology gives you genuine agency about how you interact with it in the future.
Some of the “older people” were around in the dot com bubble. It’s not that we think there’s no future for it (the internet didn’t go away after the dot com bubble burst) it’s that it’s currently unreliable tech. I use it all the time, but I’m not going to put significant effort into integrating it into my workflow until after the bubble bursts. The costs are currently being subsidized by a ridiculous amount of investment dollars so we don’t actually know what the price tag will be when they need to make a profit to make a return on the investment. Currently AI is in a similar place to companies like AOL were in the dot com bubble when you look at the finances of this thing.
Also be aware that fraud has been effectively decriminalized in the US. There are no consequences for lying to investors now. And they are lying. The statement that “software development has been solved” is a lie. Some of us know about the Halting Problem and know that statements like that are mathematically false.
After the bubble bursts, the tech will become more reasonable. We’ll have actual prices so we can assess where the tech is worthwhile to use and where it’s too expensive to use. Choosing where to use an algorithm and where not to use an algorithm is what software engineering has always been about, so it’s not exactly a game changer.
In the meantime, yeah I use the investor subsidized service, because why not use something someone else is paying for? It gives me an idea of which problems it’s suitable for and which problems it’s not good for. When there’s actually real prices to the tech I’ll know everything I need to know to be able to make more permanent implementations of the tech. But I know from experience that it’s a bad idea to become dependent on tech before you know what the price tag will be.
It’s kind of an Iceland situation. In Iceland there was a massive influx of money from hedge fund operations. Fishermen became bankers. Then 2008 happened, and the bankers had to go back to being fishermen again. The lesson is, when there’s amounts of money that doesn’t even make sense being thrown around, it’s a good idea to still maintain your fishing boats and nets.
It is certainly true that AI is in a bubble, alongside the (false) economy. I just have a feeling that people are deluding themselves into thinking AI is useless and undesirable to society, and by doing so, are robbing themselves and the better parts of society the opportunity to steer the future.
Your measured approach is an appropriate response. Familiarity with the technology gives you genuine agency about how you interact with it in the future.