170 points

The social contract struck between the U.S. government and Silicon Valley—which the American people became an involuntary party to—was straightforward: We will let a handful of tech bros become unfathomably wealthy and in exchange they will build a tech industry that keeps America globally dominant. Instead, the tech bros broke the bargain. They took the money, but instead of continuing to innovate and compete, built monopolies to keep out competition—even getting the help of the U.S. national security state to block Chinese access to our tech. But they couldn’t keep out of the competition forever. Lina Khan was right. And now here we are.

permalink
report
reply
58 points
*

Regardless how this plays out that was a very satisfying article to read and the quoted section above is a big part of that.

also I haven’t made any investment of my time or money into A.I. so my personal smug-o-meter needle is buried high-side right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Keeping your money out of the AI grift was a good idea but doesn’t deep seek imply that powerful AI is coming even faster and cheaper than what was already being promised?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Yeah, they seem to have sped up the process. But something else to keep in mind is that we don’t know what the saturation point is with current AI technology. It’s most likely far less that what has been hyped, but regardless, if our governments had any sense, they’d be getting a sensible regulatory framework in place right now rather than being overtaken by events as they usually are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If their claims are true, yeah. That’s how I read the implications.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Dropsite is great and Ryan Grim is a treasure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I am feeling dangerously smug

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

they will build a tech industry that keeps America globally dominant.

I don’t buy it.

At least this Altmann guy has already made it clear that he personally wants to be the ruler of the world, and he builds the tools to bring him there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Wow, we could have been talking about Jacquard mills and running essentially the same narrative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
158 points

Man, the hysterical, unhinged US market just has no chill.

Someone came up with a better chatbot-- “OMG, superintelligence is here and is inevitable, all hail our robot overlords and their broligarch creators!”

Somebody outside the US had an idea to train a chatbot for cheaper-- “OMG, US tech is doomed, they have no recourse against this and all the hardware is now worthless!”

Maybe if the markets weren’t constantly freaking the hell out about any semblance of technological innovation in search for the next Google or Apple they woldn’t have to deflate like a balloon each time reality sets in.

permalink
report
reply
44 points

The market’s chronic convulsive disorder is, imo, an inefficient pricing problem. Price discovery doesn’t really exist, most of the trading volume is “off-exchange” and market makers have severe unchecked moral hazards in how they do business.

The underlying value of publicly traded companies simply does not change as fast as this. Regardless of what you might say about the speed at which the market reacts to new information. In a world where the media openly and solely serves the interests of billionaires and a small outfit like Wall Street On Parade is routinely censored on socials, there’s no reason to believe anything you’re ever told by the news about any moves in the market.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Stock investing isn’t about underlying value. The company itself is almost irrelevant. Stock investing is about predicting stock investor sentiment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

That’s not a traditional view of investing or the manner in which securities are built to be valued, but it is admittedly the modal paradigm to which we are subject.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Fancy word foot work for “speculation”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I like this observation, because the kind of information imbalance normal for today wasn’t for late XIX and early XX centuries, where our common ideas of economics originate, Marxist and Austrian and what not.

It’s not that the weak could say more about the strong in the press, it’s the speed with which information traveled, and also that the strong had more trouble coordinating their actions.

Why did I type this bullshit anyway, as if it changes something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Big mood.

Do people still say big mood?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The “underlying value” isn’t much of a concern if you’re someone seeking funding or a small investor. It’s also not much of a concern if the “unchecked moral hazards” are still funneling money towards a small group of capitalists. Or if the political ramifications of the reporting are impactful in other areas.

It’s not a media conspiracy if all the real world consequences are based on the same consensual reality. “It’s all fake reporting anyway” is not a valid response here, even without disputing the base assumptions, which I probably would.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Their unhinged need for growth/metastasis to to feed their ego scores is unquenchable and ending the world.

It’s tragic we won’t physically stop them via revolution. We are cowards that mistake this quiet slaughter for peace. The planet will have to do it for us, and take us and a lot of innocent surface life with them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You… may not have been following the news for the past couple of years.

Doesn’t quite look like “quiet death mistaken for peace” out there, and it seems like the world destroying is very much being done with guns, as per usual.

Endless capitalist growth and wealth accumulation is still bad, though, don’t get me wrong, and oligarchy is, as always, tied to all the rest of it. That’s just a bit of a reductionist take.

permalink
report
parent
reply
135 points

Im glad DeepSeek open sourced their model. Even if the goal was to destabilize US companies, I think it’s a blessing the tools can go to anyone with a “powerful enough” computer.

And to be really honest, I don’t like what the tech companies have done with AI in such a short amount of time. I’m glad they are getting the piss beaten out of them. All these AI companies will do whatever it takes to destroy human labor pools so they can absorb a fraction of our wages.

The sad part is, they are after a fraction of a wage that is already undervalued. We are all struggling because of corporate greed anyway.

permalink
report
reply
56 points

Im glad DeepSeek open sourced their model. Even if the goal was to destabilize US companies,

back in my day this was called a “free market”, now we have start ups from china doing it to the US private capital.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Even someone as far back as Adam Smith knew that businesses hate competition and will do anything they can to avoid it. The broligarchy was speed-running the construction of an oligopoly and lobbying the government to erect barriers to entry so they could take their sweet time milking us dry. Now I’m not sure about what the real backstory of DeepSeek might be, but it is still satisfying to see Altman get his ass handed to him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
84 points

And if China increasingly becomes the place to go work if you’re an ambitious researcher or developer, it’s not hard to see where that leads.

Is that a thing? I know China’s research sector is large and growing, but I never heard of it attracting foreigners.

“The accusations/obsessions over DeepSeek using H100 sound like a rich kids team got outplayed by a poor kids team, who weren’t even allowed shoes,” tweeted Jen Zhu, an AI investor, “and now the rich kids are demanding an investigation into whether shoes were used instead of training harder to improve themselves.”

This is amazing.

permalink
report
reply
19 points
*

Is that a thing? I know China’s research sector is large and growing, but I never heard of it attracting foreigners.

They offer very competitive salaries, if I knew Chinese and was 10-15 years younger I would have considered it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Is that a thing?

Yes. It’s not common for Americans to come to China, but many in other parts of the world do. Currently living in Russia, I personally know a few folks, primarily from IT sector, moving there for new opportunities.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

It is very much not a thing. At least not for American tech workers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

The US is 4% of the world’s population.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

I’ll be honest, I’m just hoping this AI shit calms down. Every 5-6 new papers published in the Journal of Computer Science is some AI slop. Like we get it, it’s fun filling a big ass matrix with weights which then inadvertently solve a problem you have. Could I please have some novel research that probably won’t go anywhere anytime soon but is kind of fun to think about and tinker with?

permalink
report
reply
22 points

AI is the new blockchain

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

And Electrum still crashes under FreeBSD when trying to send BTC, and I don’t see many more FOSS thin wallets for BTC, despite it being the cryptocurrency. And using 15GB for a wallet is out of question.

If it works the same way with “AI”, we might eventually see this wave of bullshit recede.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

we might eventually see this wave of bullshit recede.

Can’t wait

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

You can always get into 3d printing.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

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


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 597K

    Comments