[HN Gopher] Goldman Sachs: AI Is overhyped, expensive, and unrel...
___________________________________________________________________
Goldman Sachs: AI Is overhyped, expensive, and unreliable
Author : mrzool
Score : 57 points
Date : 2024-07-12 20:12 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.404media.co)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.404media.co)
| gnabgib wrote:
| Discussions
|
| (88 points, 12 days ago, 157 comments)
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40837081
|
| (89 points, 1 week ago, 47 comments)
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40885632
| unstatusthequo wrote:
| Also Goldman Sachs: uses quant algorithms for high speed trading
| at scale.
|
| What a joke.
| drewcoo wrote:
| There is no contradiction in that.
|
| I'd like to see the quants that are using ChatGPT for HFT.
| Apples and oranges.
| TeaBrain wrote:
| The existence of sophisticated algorithms does not necessarily
| imply the existence of machine learning/"AI". Despite Rentech
| executing all their trades via algorithmic models, Jim Simons
| once said that they didn't use any machine learning.
| johnthewise wrote:
| https://youtu.be/X72PZ_tQ4cA?si=Mj-w9iXFO4CCTCj0&t=78 I think
| he says the opposite.
| pie420 wrote:
| Goldman Sachs has no reason to disseminate valuable market
| insights and analysis for free. All financial thinkpieces by
| investment firms should be disregarded as economic manipulation
| and propaganda
| sojournerc wrote:
| They do have an interest in accurate pricing in markets (as
| does any investor). Sometimes something can be both true and
| have a portion of self-interest. An organization of that size
| might know something you don't.
|
| Do you have information they don't? Can you show that LLM tools
| are worthy of the hype (investment in particular), are
| consistent, and reliable? That's certainly not my experience.
|
| It's worth saying the emperor has no clothes, especially if we
| want to avoid the bubble pop, which admittedly GS has an
| interest in.
| singleshot_ wrote:
| Incomplete understanding of GS's business and why someone might
| want to do business with them.
| ohxh wrote:
| Or maybe they _do_ believe this, and entered into trades to
| express this sentiment. Now, they need the market to correct to
| what (they believe) is accurate, so they can take profits and
| free up their capital again.
| ramon156 wrote:
| News flash, stock related company says thing to influence market
| tedsanders wrote:
| Goldman is correct that AI is expensive and unreliable.
|
| But it's only overhyped if AI stays that way.
|
| The hype isn't coming from where AI is today, but where it will
| be in 2030 and 2040.
|
| What excites the true believers is the slope, not the intercept.
| swatcoder wrote:
| That's not a very interesting opportunity for insitutional
| investors (hedge funds, banks, pensions, etc). They have the
| resources and confidence to move fast and cleverly and don't
| need to make big bets on far off possibilities. They have
| better things to do with their money in the meantime.
|
| The nearly $1T in investment hype since Q42022 was chasing the
| possibility that revolutionary commercialization of generative
| AI might arrive any day. That no longer seems likely.
|
| As you note, there seem to be at least a few more profound
| discoveries that need to be made and matured, and so that
| revolution is still a long way out (from the perspective of
| these investors), even if it looks meaningfully more possible
| than it did two years ago.
| xk_id wrote:
| "Over an arbitrarily long timeline, assuming stable
| geopolitical conditions, technology will continue to improve,
| at an arbitrary rate". What a groundbreaking insight, no wonder
| people are excited.
| elevatedastalt wrote:
| The slope has changed between 10 years and ago.
|
| You are free to disagree, but don't pretend like you don't
| understand what the AI crowd is saying.
| xk_id wrote:
| Never in the history of man has the slope of progress been
| linear. The AI crowd is entirely predicated on a platitude.
| _heimdall wrote:
| The hype follows what OpenAI's latest release does though, not
| what OpenAI may release in a decade or two.
|
| > What excites the true believers is the slope, not the
| intercept.
|
| The phrase "true believers" jumps out to me here. It sure makes
| AI (well, ML) sound more like a religion than a field of
| technological research.
| elevatedastalt wrote:
| > The hype follows what OpenAI's latest release does though
|
| Yes, because what OpenAI releases today helps us improve the
| prediction of what it may release in a decade or so.
| signal_space wrote:
| Cult of the exponential, considers sigmoids heresy.
| inopinatus wrote:
| [delayed]
| nipponese wrote:
| Actual report https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelligence/pages/gs-
| research/...
|
| Right in the preamble
|
| ..despite these concerns and constraints, we still see room for
| the AI theme to run, either because AI starts to deliver on its
| promise, or because bubbles take a long time to burst.
| knowaveragejoe wrote:
| Overhyped? Sure. Expensive? Definitely. Unreliable? Sometimes.
|
| So many HNers love to be contrarian about anything resembling a
| hype train, and feel validated when a report like this comes
| out. I think the reality is that people moving forward with
| integrating AI into various aspects of their business and
| reaping the rewards aren't here making snarky "I told you so"
| comments, which seems to be every other comment on this and the
| other threads about the same article.
| monero-xmr wrote:
| HN is overwhelmingly pro-AI and on the LLM hype train.
| Silicon Valley and YC are largely _only_ investing in that
| sector right now. Pretending there is some huge contrarian
| group here is absurd
| jncfhnb wrote:
| Sometimes unreliable is a very funny qualifier. If something
| were consistently unreliable then unreliable wouldn't be the
| right term.
| sojournerc wrote:
| But, I've yet to see the "rewards". I see tech companies
| laying off staff with the expectation of AI taking up the
| slack while every piece of software I use gets shitier. Show
| me the bottom line improvement, or better tools, better art,
| better music... It just doesn't live up to the hype.
| EternalFury wrote:
| It's healthy for GS to express a contrarian opinion.
|
| If GPT 5 doesn't meet high expectations, another winter could
| soon arrive.
| duskwuff wrote:
| If the success of a single company -- indeed, a _single
| product_ -- is really that pivotal, the industry is already on
| the brink of collapse.
| crispyambulance wrote:
| Goldman Sachs is overhyped, overpaid, and unreliable.
| DarkNova6 wrote:
| Those are not mutually exclusive.
| frithsun wrote:
| AI is enabling a new generation of exploits and hacks that will
| force tech to get a lot simpler, more human readable, and more
| privacy oriented.
|
| Everything is going to need to be refactored for a world where
| bad actors have truly unlimited time and attention to invest in
| identifying privacy and security vulnerabilities.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-07-12 23:00 UTC)