[eureka-belief]

The reality is, the economy is on a ticking timer for when it will be turned upside down by 1) LLM agent workflows 2) AGI 3) superintelligence. There are many companies who know this and want to hedge against that future but they simply don’t know how yet. The tricky part about productizing LLMs is that your product designers need to have a full understanding of LLMs and what they can and cannot do. So currently many of the existing product designs and AI user experiences still suck.

The biggest misconception is that just because chatbots are now more capable that somehow that means that you should replace your UI with one.

[hatefulmoron]

The timer might be much longer than it's fashionable to believe right now, which would make this sort of FOMO investment completely pointless.

[alephnerd]

Depends on the industry and use case.

For example, AI leveraged SOC is going to be operational within 3-5 years, and there goes 50-70% of jobs in that sector.

Others segments are significantly behind (robo-taxis) and I'm sure there are other segments much further ahead (call center automation), but the change is absolutely coming - not because of LLMs alone, but because the entire ecosystem around ML/AI is a 15 years old now, and there's an entire generation of SWEs that are just as competent as ML PhDs were 15 years ago.

[SgtBastard]

>there goes 50-70% of the jobs in that sector.

Does this always follow though? Mass automation can just as easily make the existing staff far more effective, making the ROI easier to justify.

[voiceblue]

GP is rebutting the “upside downing” of the economy by superintelligent AGI. If you meant to argue that case, your points seem insufficient.

[alephnerd]

I don't think superintelligent AGI will occur in our life span.

That said, most investment in ML/AI is around applications of ML in automating specific domains.

My argument is against this:

> FOMO investment completely pointless

I have an example of a 10-11 figure TAM industry that is actively in the process of migrating to being majority automated, and there are plenty of other industries in the midst of this as well.

[hatefulmoron]

The part of my post you're replying to concerns my thoughts on something much broader, though. My claim is not that all investment today is pointless, but that investment predicated on the belief that we're a few years away from the economy being "turned upside down by 1) LLM agent workflows 2) AGI 3) superintelligence" is bad.

It feels like a Motte-and-bailey type issue. If I point out that the original claim doesn't have enough evidence and is purely speculation, I don't really want to hear about how call center jobs are being affected by LLMs. I don't disagree, but we're not talking about the same thing here.

[alephnerd]

> investment predicated on the belief that we're a few years away from the economy being "turned upside down by 1) LLM agent workflows 2) AGI 3) superintelligence" is bad

No one is investing on that assumption. I've been in the PE/VC for a couple years now and I've never heard anyone from Associate to LP say that straight faced and unironically.

[rsynnott]

I’ll… well, I’ll believe the magic robots replacing security people when I see it. That seems a _particularly_ implausible one, really.

As you imply yourself, robotaxis did not deliver on the grandiose promises of a decade ago. What makes you so sure that the generative stuff will be any different?

[alephnerd]

> the magic robots replacing security people when I see it. That seems a _particularly_ implausible one

That's not what SOC is...

[rsynnott]

Wait, what is it, then? I assumed you meant security ops.