[turblety]

Maybe romantic, that's fair. But I think a world with lots of different choices and options is far better, than one with a single few efficient/optimal solutions.

Burning money to reinvent things is fine with me if it trains people up, pays people a salary, creates some original ideas, leads to more choice in the market.

[BoredPositron]

But that's the whole point it never does lead to more choice in the market. Maybe for the year of the hype cycle after that it gets consolidated real quick.

[turblety]

We could say the same before AI, but I don't think it's true. Ignoring AI for a moment, if I look at databases as an example, there is lots of choice and competition out there:

MySQL, MariaDB, PostgreSQL, TimescaleDB, CockroachDB, YugabyteDB, Teradata, Snowflake, TiDB, SQLite, DuckDB, and more probably.

I think it's led to great choice and a great sharing of ideas. Theres also been a lot of failures too, that's true, but I'm sure some of those failures have led to a few unique features across those products too.

So now with AI, for me it's the same process, just accelerated. Yes, there is lots of junk coming out there, but I think there's lots of good too.

[BoredPositron]

The situation differs when people work within established domains, where the foundational ideas have already been explored. atm everyone does exactly the same some with more salt some with more pepper. Just look back a few months how many of the RAG implementations survived?