[mark_l_watson]

I think that NVIDIA’s moat is the US government. Remember our government’s efforts to prevent the use of Huawei cell infrastructure in Europe and around the world?

I am a long time fan of Dave Sacks and the All In podcast ‘besties’ but now that he is ‘AI czar’ for our government it is interesting what he does not talk about. For example on a recent podcast he was pumping up AI as a long term solution to US economic woes, but a week before that podcast, a well known study was released that showed that 95% of new LLM/AI corporate projects were fails. Another thing that he swept under the rug was the recent Stanford study that 80% of US startups are saving money using less expensive Chinese (and Mistral, and Google Gemma??) models. When the Stanford study was released, I watched All In material for a few weeks, expecting David Sack’s take on the study. Not a word from him.

Apologies for this off-topic rant but I am really concerned how my country is spending resources on AI infrastructure. I think this is a massive bubble, but I am not sure how catastrophic the bubble will be.

[heavyset_go]

> Remember our government’s efforts to prevent the use of Huawei cell infrastructure in Europe and around the world?

The US is burning good will at an alarming rate, how long will countries keep paying a premium to be spied on by the US instead of China?

[mark_l_watson]

I think the answer to your question is ‘not for very long.’ I frequently have breakfast with a friend who is a retired math professor and he is an avid investor in the stock market. We talk a lot about how long the US stock market will keep increasing in value. We don’t know the answer about the stock market, but it is fun to talk about. We both want to start easing out of the stock market.

[rsynnott]

The main competitors to Huawei in cell network stuff are mostly European (Nokia and friends), not American.

[ivape]

They are heavy into AI investing but will tell people AI startups are just toy apps (Chamath). That podcast is full of crooks. I’d be willing to give them a pass as bunch of old white guy techies that just love to talk about tech, but they are literally at the dinner table with Trump and Musk.

This country used to have congressional hearings on all kinds of matters from baseball to the Mafia. Tech collusion and insider knowledge is not getting investigated. The All-in podcast requires serious investigation, with question #1 being “how the fuck did you guys manage to influence the White House?”.

Other notes:

- Many of them are technically illiterate

- They will speak in business talk , you won’t find a hint of intimate technical knowledge

- The more you watch it, the more you realize that money absolutely buys a seat at the table:

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/goskagit.com/co...

(^ Saved myself another thousand words)

[hbarka]

Remember that time in history when Chamath thought he found gold in SPACs. Hubris is easily forgotten or forgiven.

[anonymousDan]

You say 95% failed like it's a bad thing - a 5% success rate sounds reasonable to me in terms of startups!

[GoatInGrey]

It's not startup success rate, it's application of the technology at companies. Meaning that 95% of the time that AI is applied to a work problem, it fails to generate material value over existing methods.

[nikkwong]

Sacks has always been absolutely disingenuous and interested in pedaling his own interests over the interests of the common good. As a total Trump shill he talks out of both sides of his mouth at the same time & accuses the left of things that he has no problem with when he or his own party does it.

Anyone who's listened to him (even those who align with him politically) for an extended period of time can't help but to notice so obviously so self interested to the point of total hypocrisy—the examples of which are too many to begin to even wanting to enumerate. Like—take the Trump/Epstein stuff, or the Elon/Trump fallout—topics he would absolutely lose his sh*t over if these were characters on the left. I find it hard to believe anyone actually ever took him seriously. Branding myself as a fan of his would just be a completely self-humiliating insult to my intelligence and my conscience IMO.

[giancarlostoro]

> a week before that podcast, a well known study was released that showed that 95% of new LLM/AI corporate projects were fails.

I mean. I think some of us knew this. There's a lot of issues with AI, some psychological, some are risk adverse individuals who would love to save hours, weeks, months, maybe years of time with AI, but if AI screws up, its bad, really bad, legal hell bad, unless you have a model with a 100% success rate for the task, it wont be used in certain fields.

I think in the more creative fields its very useful, since hallucinations are okay, its when you try to get realistic / look reasonably realistic (in the case of cartoons) that it gets iffy. Even so though, who wants to pay the true cost of AI? There's a big uphill cost involved.

It reminds me a lot of crypto mining, mostly because you need an insane amount to invest into before you become profitable.