this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59587 readers
2940 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

AI is overhyped and unreliable -Goldman Sachs

https://www.404media.co/goldman-sachs-ai-is-overhyped-wildly-expensive-and-unreliable/

"Despite its expensive price tag, the technology is nowhere near where it needs to be in order to be useful for even such basic tasks"

@technology@lemmy.world

(page 2) 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

Yeah but it's Goldman Sachs saying it. Presumably because they haven't invested in AI.

Perhaps we could get a non-biased opinion and also from an actual expert rather than some finance ghoul who really doesn't know anything?

[–] balder1991@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The problem is experts in AI are biased towards AI (it pays their salaries).

[–] enleeten@discuss.online 0 points 4 months ago

You dare to challenge Goldman Sacks?

[–] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 4 months ago

It's noteworthy because it's Goldman Sachs. Lots of money people are dumping it into AI. When a major outlet for money people starts to show skepticism, that could mean the bubble is about to pop.

[–] demonsword@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Presumably because they haven’t invested in AI.

Presumably is carrying all the weight of your whole post here

Perhaps we could get a non-biased opinion and also from an actual expert rather than some finance ghoul who really doesn’t know anything?

I also hate banks, but usually those guys can sniff out market failures way ahead of the rest of us. All their bacon rides on that, after all

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point

[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 0 points 4 months ago

I mean they aren't wrong. From an efficiency standpoint, current AI is like using a 350hp car engine to turn a childs rock tumbler, or spin art thingy. Sure, it produces some interesting outputs, at the cost of way too much energy for what is being done. That is the current scenario of using generalized compute or even high end GPUs for AI.

Best I can tell is, the "way forward" is further development of ASICs that are specific to the model being run. This should increase efficiency, decrease the ecological impact (less electricity usage) and free up silicon and components, possibly decreasing price and increasing availablity of things like consumer graphics cards again (but I won't hold my breath for that part).

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago

Wow, I hate Goldman Sachs, but I think they're on to something here...

[–] jackblackx@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

AI is dangerous...

The singularity is near...

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 0 points 4 months ago
  1. Define singularity in this context
  2. Define near in this context
[–] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 0 points 4 months ago

Goldman Sachs is overhyped and unreliable.

[–] Fades@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Absolutely true, but the morons (willful and no) will take this as additional proof that it's altogether useless and a net negative.

There’s not a lot I agree with GS on, but this is on the list.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›