this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
-109 points (10.2% liked)

Technology

77090 readers
3405 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MysticKetchup@lemmy.world 52 points 4 days ago (1 children)
  1. This is way too brief and lacks any actual evidence for its argument
  2. It doesn't touch on the main argument of AI bubble forecasters: that AI costs a massive amount of money to develop and run but does not make nearly enough money to recoup that investment. And people don't seem to be interested enough in AI to actually pay for it, especially given that the actual price will be very high
[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 0 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I pay for it. One of the services I pay is about $25/mo and they release about one update a year or so. It's not cutting edge, just specialized. And they are making a profit doing a bit of tech investment and running the service, apparently. But also they are just tuning and packaging a publicly available model, not creating their own.

What can't be sustained is this sprint to AGI or to always stay at the head of the pack. It's too much investment for tiny gains that ultimately don't move the needle a lot. I guess if the companies all destroy one another until only one remains, or someone really does attain AGI, they will realize gains. I'm not sure I see that working out, though.

[–] setsubyou@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But also they are just tuning and packaging a publicly available model, not creating their own.

So they can be profitable because the cost of creating that model isn’t factored in, and if people stop throwing money at LLMs and stop releasing models for free, there goes their business model. So this is not really sustainable either.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The people releasing public models aren't the ones doing this for profit. Mostly. I know OpenAI and DeepSeek both have. Guess I'll have to go look up who trained GLM, but I suspect the resources will always be there to push the technology forward at a slower pace. People will learn to do more with less resources and that's where the bulk of the gains will be made.

Edit: A Chinese university trained GLM. Which is the sort of place where I expect research will continue to be done.

[–] setsubyou@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A Chinese university trained GLM

A startup spun out by a university (z.ai). Their business model is similar to what everybody else does, they host their models and sell access while trying to undercut each other. And like others they raised billions in funding from investors to be able to do this.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The model is publicly available. You and I can run it — I do. People will continue to do research long after the bubble bursts. People will continue to make breakthroughs. The technology will continue forward, just at a slower, healthier pace once the money tightens up.