Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cwbrandsma 311 days ago
AI is somehow supposed to generate $1T a year by 2028? From where? Never mind the lack of electric grid capacity to keep all of this running.
4 comments

OpenAI's ChatGPT alone hit 500 million weekly active users in March, apparently they're closer to 800 million now. I guess they're still working out the monetization strategy, but in the worst case just think of how Google makes their revenue off search..
Each ChatGPT query costs orders of magnitude more than a google search. I can’t say for sure how many orders, but I suspect more than a few.
The first one does, then prompt caching kicks in.. turns out many people ask similar questions. People who frequently ask complicated questions might have to pay extra, we can already see this playing out.
That’s not what prompt caching is.

Also, most ChatGPT users have their “personalization” prefix in the system prompt (which contains things like date/time), which would break caching of the actual user-query.

The prompt has to be precisely the same for that to work (and of course now you have to have an embedding hashmap which is its own somewhat advanced problem.) I doubt they do that especially given the things I've heard from API users.
you realise now google is plugging gemini to all their queries and giving you summaries and stuff

so maybe not so much anymore? would be true if it was -pure- search on google's part but it isn't anymore

> google is plugging gemini to all their queries

Not to all, definitely. I haven't figured out what is the differentiator here but many queries are excluded.

I read someone that adding -nsfw- or such words to the prompt made it go away reliably funnily enough
The delta might not be that large these days, with the AI suggestions that Google is placing on search result pages.
Because they have their own hardware.
Say: 3 billion users, 20% xconvert to customers (600M) paying 20mo, is a combined 144B. Nowhere near a 1T reality
I'm curious why they only publish weekly active users. Isn't it usually monthly active users?
In the recent Sam Altman interview he said the plan should be keep burning fossil fuels to power the data centers running AI because that’s the path to fusion. Just like LLM can help devs code 100x faster they can do that for nuclear engineers too.
Fusion seems short-sighted though. Antimatter is 100% efficient. I personally think Sam Altman should be looking into something like an Infinite Improbability Drive as it would would be a better fit here.
Sounds like he is sucking up to the Dear Leader and his sponsors again.
The pro-singularity/AGI people genuinely seem to believe that takeoff is going to happen within the next decade, so they should get a pass on the "haha they're saying that because they want to pander to Trump" accusations.
> The pro-singularity/AGI people genuinely seem to believe that takeoff is going to happen within the next decade

I'm as anti-AI as it can get - it has its uses, but it is still fundamentally built on outright sharting on all kinds of ethics, and that's just the training phase - the actual usage is filled with even more snake-oil salesmen and fraudsters, and that's not to speak of all the jobs for humans that are going to be irreversibly replaced by AI.

But I think the AGI people are actually correct in their assumption - somewhen the next 10-20 years, the AGI milestone will be hit. Most probably not on LLM basis, but it will hit. And societies are absolutely not prepared to deal with the fallout, quite the contrary - particularly the current US administration is throwing us all in front of the multibillionaire wolves.

> somewhen the next 10-20 years, the AGI milestone will be hit

You seem quite confident for a person who doesn't offer any arguments on why it would happen at all, and why within two decades specifically, especially if you claim it won't be LLM-based.

Second, if AGI means that ChatGPT doesn't hallucinate and has a practically infinite context window, that's good for humanity but I fail to see any of the usual terrible things happening like the "fallout" you mention. We'll adapt just like we adapted to using LLMs.

> You seem quite confident for a person who doesn't offer any arguments on why it would happen at all, and why within two decades specifically, especially if you claim it won't be LLM-based.

Rather sooner than later, IMHO the sheer amount of global compute capacity available will be enough to achieve that task. Brute force, basically. Doesn't take much imagination other than looking at how exponential curves work.

> that's good for humanity but I fail to see any of the usual terrible things happening like the "fallout" you mention.

A decent-enough AI, especially an AGI, will displace a lot of white collar workers - creatives are already getting hit hard and that is with AI still not being able to paint realistic fingers, and the typical "paper pusher" jobs will also be replaced by AI. In the "meatspace", aka robots doing tasks that are _for now_ not achievable by robots (say because the haptic feedback is lacking) there has been pretty impressive research happening over the last years. So that's a lot of blue collar / trades jobs going to go away as well when the mechanical bodies are linked up to an AI control system.

> We'll adapt just like we adapted to using LLMs.

Yeah, we just stuck the finger towards those affected. That's not adaptation, that's leaving people to be eaten by the wolves.

We're fast heading for a select few megacorporations holding all the power when it comes to AI, and everyone else will be serfs or outright slaves to them instead of the old scifi dreams where humans would be able to chill out and relax all day.

Somewhen?
You statement could be seen as sarcastic...or not...and in itself that is tragic...
Maybe if we put them in some sort of four armed exoskeleton
If nobody has a job, I am unsure who will be left to pay the subscription fee.
The other way around maybe?

They think the employers are going to line up to pay billions for AI workers in order to avoid paying trillions in benefits to human ones?

And who will buy the products and serivces of these "employers" when nobody has a job?

See you can keep adding middle layers, but eventually you'll find there's no one with any money at the bottom of this pyramid to prop this whole thing up.

When the consumer driven economy has no critical mass of consumers, the whole model kinda goes belly up, no?

Perhaps a feudal economy where it is just the wealthy who consume. The rest of humanity is pure subsistence.
Who buys the products then?
Who will be the customers for those employers?
5 million claude agents? Oh wait that's a billion. Yeah it's not happening.