[thenaturalist]

The technology, maybe - and if on local.

The public co valuations of quickly depreciating chip hoarders selling expensive fever dreams to enterprises are gonna pop though.

Spend 3-7 USD for 20 cents in return and 95% project failures rates for quarters on end aren't gonna go unnoticed on Wall St.

[Mars008]

So far there is no 'plateau' in the nearest future. 'AI' as a science and its applications should develop further for the next several years. Models will get more efficient, but still the bigger the better. This is obvious. Even if models don't scale up well, they can be used collectively in parallel 'brainstorming'. This will still create demand for hardware. Stagnation is still possible in case of recession. In this case even stable businesses will suffer.

As for efficiency, replacing one programmer in group of 10 with AI already will increase productivity and lower the price. In most cases. In reality adding AI accounts to existing group works better. This is _now_, not hopes or sci-fi.

That's why I'm saying there is no way back. 'AI winter' is as likely as smartphones winter.

[thenaturalist]

Your entire argument is whoefully ignoring the CapEx economics of all of this.

But that's the foundation.

And there is a plateau in real money spent on AI chips.

You're ignoring a whole group of economic and finance professionals as well as - if you're inclined to listen to their voices more - Sama calling it a bubble.

If not for AI spending, the US already would be in a recession.

So your argument might sound nice and practical from a purely scientific perspective or the narrow use case of AI coding support, but it's entirely detached from reality.

[Mars008]

The basics here is return for investments. If it's all just a bubble it will pop. We'll see soon. For now it doesn't look like, to me. And that creates a lot of complexity on top of 'digital divide' we already have.