[shimman]

AI is so useful they have to subsidize it with trillions of dollars while having no near term profit. AI is so useful that you have to threaten workers in order for them to use the tools.

I'm sorry but all of this is to be determined but if the present is any indicator LLMs tend to make things distinctly worse, not better. Any areas of "potential" still rely on massive amounts of manual human labor, hardly a trillion dollar industry.

"Useful" in the sense of cheap parlor tricks, useful in the real sense that it enables mass surveillance on the cheap; but actually useless for the material lives of people around the world.

I'm sure it's great if you're a rich tech bro.

[pixl97]

Conflating useful and profitable is a strawman you've created yourself. There are plenty of issues with AI but that's a weird hill to stand on.

[customguy]

Whereas randomly ranting against "bureaucracy", in light of DOGE and Epstein emails (elite = morons) and what Thiel and the Palantir CEO are on about, is totally normal, isn't projection at all, and talking about "rage" isn't a strawman either. No, that requires a serious rebuttal, being a serious argument and all.

[hatefulheart]

Indeed it is so self evidently useful that you have to discover the correct way to use it.

[adamddev1]

I made one language learning app with a top end LLM backend and at first I thought it was magic. But as I and other people used it more I realized:

- This thing is very consistently lying and misleading people. Do I want to introduce more deception and confusion into the world?

- people don't actually want to use this.

- I don't actually want to use this.

- Something about this feels wrong.

I dropped it. I have another couple of big language learning projects made with 100% human blood sweat and tears, long projects over many years. Zero LLMs or voice models used for anything. Those continue to grow and are loved, and I feel great about them.

[programmarchy]

Railroads had enormous subsidies, too. This is how infrastructure is built, even in "capitalist" economies because it operates at the level of national security. Even to this day, passenger rail is not profitable, although freight is very profitable. So it wouldn't be surprising if "passenger" AI remains unprofitable, while "freight" AI becomes very profitable.

Pretty bold statement to say it's useless for most people outside of tech. Almost every "normal" person I know including my in-laws are using it regularly. It's becoming the go-to for asking questions rather than Google, Bing, etc.

And the privacy battle was lost 25 years ago. People don't really care if corporations know about their search history (Google), or their private lives (Facebook). You're beating a dead horse there.

[shimman]

I like your analogy on railroads because it leads us to the point that these tech companies should honestly be nationalized at this point as they are a danger to the country writ large.