Great idea!

only several trillion dollars of the economy invested in AI but let's have it fail so you can feel better.

Brilliant!

of course when the entire stock market collapses and the economy goes into LITERAL RECESSION because the only positive driver right now is AI development-

job growth will be spectacular right?

LUDDITES today are the same dummies who were hoping the industrial revolution would fail so that people could remain farming the land with horses and wagons.

Logos Stick said:

---

Employees will start doing shadow AI, paying for their own subscriptions. It's like crack. Once you use it to minimize the work you have to do, you're hooked.

---

This is true, I use AI a lot and I am hooked. Being GenX, I grew up pre-email and pre-internet and I cannot imagine a world like that. Now I cannot imagine a world that existed just 3 years ago with no ChatGPT. The tech is amazing. However real world concerns exist. I already see companies restricting the free tier. Grok does not let you take pictures and make videos anymore, you gotta pay. ChatGPT wants you to pay if you upload something. Limits getting tighter.

They want to get people hooked so they pay. I don't see ads, I am okay if they push ads to keep it free.

BigRobSA said:

---

I believe it.

Also, if corporate America would get smart, they'd cut the massive costs of numerous levels of "management" that have no intrinsic value: like managers, answering to managers, answering to managers, answering to a senior manager , answering to a director(s) , answering to Sr. Director(s), and so on....with several levels of VPs.

That's a **** ton of labor cost that can, and should, be cut before they cut the actual laborers making the product and/or "AI".

---

I can't freaking star this enough.

In nearly every state agency I know of in Texas, entire departments have been created solely to give someone a "leadership" position.

Coincidentally (yeah, right), every one of the "leaders" knows their new boss because they either went to school with them, worked with them at another agency or company, or they knew someone who knew someone high enough to have the job made for them.

Yes, there are even departments that consist of two employees and one "leader".

And, yes, this is happening throughout the great state of Texas, because of course it is.

Wildmen03 said:

---

So many companies are racing to be first, but they don't know why they are racing or what they are going to do once they get to the finish line.

---

Yes.

They all want to say, "We have/do AI," if for nothing more than to show their current and relevant, and if they're on the stock market, to use "We have/do AI," to get their stock to jump so they can make as much money as quickly as possible, even if they offer nothing new.

There are a lot of YouTube videos by people both in AI and on Wall Street that are saying the AI Bubble is going to crash even worse than the Tech Bubble.

Let's just hope that if that happens, our economy is stronger than it was when the Tech Bubble popped. Otherwise, the fallout will be one for the record books.

The days of free AI are coming to an end imo. OpenAI is planning to do ads, which they said they would never do.

Now what happens to the "truth" when that happens? AI is not search. It's generating responses based on ingress. If I'm company A and I'm paying for ads on your AI platform and when asked, your AI engine generates negative information about my company and my products, what happens then? Does OpenAI modify its algos to mitigate that issue?

AI wasn't free. AI was expensive and heavily subsidized. What's behind us is the heavy subsidization, because AI is now actually useful rather than a curiosity. People wouldn't pay for bad poetry or a better Google search, but now they're spinning up autonomous employees (sometimes extremely stupid employees, but still). AI expense is not exploding because delivering the same quality of AI got more expensive, it's because good AI got cheap and useful. It is going to get cheaper and the next gen AI will be more useful at the same cost as current models.

What is ahead of us is extremely cheap AI. Run all day spend a couple of bucks AI. What is going to happen is basically Hopper GPUs run inference for current capability models, Blackwell runs inference for future capability models (Mythos etc), and Vera Rubin does training and inference of bleeding edge models when released.

Every generation will see those models step down into the previous generation of hardware. So you get:

Consumer: GPT3 inference
Prosumer hardware: GPT4 inference
Hopper: GPT5 inference
Blackwell: GPT6 inference
Vera Rubin: GPT7 inference and training

When the replacement of Vera Rubin hits you get

Consumer: GPT4 inference
Prosumer: GPT5 inference
Hopper: GPT6 inference
Blackwell: GPT7 inference
Vera Rubin: GPT8 inference
Next Gen: GPT9 training and inference

Pattern will continue and old hardware is going to gain utility over time rather than lose utility. You may buy new computers going forward, but you're not going to retire old ones. You'll stick it in a corner, set up an agent and let it do work for you for the cost of energy.

BigRobSA said:

---

I believe it.

Also, if corporate America would get smart, they'd cut the massive costs of numerous levels of "management" that have no intrinsic value: like managers, answering to managers, answering to managers, answering to a senior manager , answering to a director(s) , answering to Sr. Director(s), and so on....with several levels of VPs.

That's a **** ton of labor cost that can, and should, be cut before they cut the actual laborers making the product and/or "AI".

---

In the absence of numerous management tiers, how would the managers be able to shift the blame?

Passing the blame is in the training set of AI replacing middle managers. We're all gonna die.

Wildmen03 said:

---

So many companies are racing to be first, but they don't know why they are racing or what they are going to do once they get to the finish line.

---

aside from you typing this-

what actual evidence do you have to back up your claim.

because the Hyper Scalers are spending LITERALLY A TRILLION DOLLARS to push forward AI

but somehow you know better about the future of technology than the thousands of PHDs working at Google META AMAZON TESLA MICRON NVIDIA?

Logos Stick said:

---

The days of free AI are coming to an end imo. OpenAI is planning to do ads, which they said they would never do.

Now what happens to the "truth" when that happens? AI is not search. It's generating responses based on ingress. If I'm company A and I'm paying for ads on your AI platform and when asked, your AI engine generates negative information about my company and my products, what happens then? Does OpenAI modify its algos to mitigate that issue?

---

Just like Google tries to mislead... I mean "influence" you through their search by having "sponsored results", these AI companies will do the same. And in a way that I won't even know it.

So if Coke wants to advertise on OpenAI, then they will try to push in Coke products in the conversations wherever it makes sense to and it will be seamless at first, but they will get greedy and turn it into AI Slop where people get turned off.

Example:

Quote:

---

User: I am tired and lethargic, what should I do?

---

Quote:

---

ChatGPT: Rest, hydrate, eat something light, and consider a short walk; a cold Coca-Cola Zero Sugar or Powerade may help temporarily, but prioritize sleep tonight instead

---

Corporations have no restraint, no finesse. They are built to ruin their own killer products by overdoing it.

Quote:

---

Critics call the mechanism a round-trip funding loop. A tech giant writes a billion-dollar check to an AI startup. The contract then forces that same money straight back, in the form of cloud rent. The cash never leaves the building.

Microsoft's $13 billion stake in OpenAI is the textbook case. The investment landed largely as Azure cloud credits. OpenAI fed those credits into training models, and Microsoft turned around and booked the consumption as fresh commercial revenue.

OpenAI's annual cloud bill has reportedly ballooned past $60 billion. The company's actual revenue sits closer to $25 billion.

---

Quote:

---

The second leg of the loop sits on the income statement. Every fresh funding round for an AI startup lets its Big Tech backer mark up the investment and drop the paper gain straight into net income.

Alphabet posted a record $62.6 billion profit in Q1 2026. About $28.7 billion of that figure came from a markup on its Anthropic stake, according to its filing.

---

https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/ai-bubble-fears-grow-big-131548421.html

The problem with today's AI - is that it isn't really AI. Its brute force computing. To get this type of "AI" smarter...means inherently raising the cost with more compute power. There are only so many tricks you can do to make this type of AI better without using more compute power. Costs will only really come down when we achieve AGI.

Depends on what you have it doing. I get it to scrap data a human couldn't possible do efficiently.

It also does text follow up for less that $30 a day.

It builds me spreadsheets from the civil docket a human could do in hours or days in minutes.

I imagine it can do all bookkeeping entries really easy.

Once it's trained and scheduled it's very good.

We won't replace any of our staff, but they will be freed up to do higher $ tasks.

LMCane said:

---

Wildmen03 said:

---

So many companies are racing to be first, but they don't know why they are racing or what they are going to do once they get to the finish line.

---

aside from you typing this-

what actual evidence do you have to back up your claim.

because the Hyper Scalers are spending LITERALLY A TRILLION DOLLARS to push forward AI

but somehow you know better about the future of technology than the thousands of PHDs working at Google META AMAZON TESLA MICRON NVIDIA?

---

I'm not who you were asking, but I can speak from my own experience that our leadership has been pushing us to "find uses for AI" for about the last year and a half.

Quote:

---

I'm not who you were asking, but I can speak from my own experience that our leadership has been pushing us to "find uses for AI" for about the last year and a half.

---

The Tech industry pushes unneeded things 24/7/365. It doesn't matter how many phds are working in Silicon Valley. They are only there because it pays better than other alternatives, not because they have stumbled on some world-shifting breakthrough.

infinity ag said:

---

hahahahhah.

Corporate America has to choose: spend on AI tokens OR spend on humans.

Since I've been in this industry for decades and know how the human mind works, here is how it will play out.

Human labor cost is expensive, we all know that. AI has just come in and the 6-10 AI companies (no one gives a damn about the smaller pretenders) have the monopoly. They need adoption, so they are taking losses to keep prices low. Stupid CEOs compare this artificially low price and fire their staff and make big long-ass tone-deaf announcements on Twitter about how humans are useless and AI is better. Eventually the market is going to catch up and this bait-and-switch won't go on for too long. AI prices will go up as AI companies (Meta, Anthropic, Google etc) need to recoup the zillions they spend on it. Where that does that come from? From their customers. The ones who fired humans and are now slaves of AI. Now don't give me the usual "free market conservative" line that other companies will come in and prices will go down. No, that won't happen as it takes years and years and lots of money to compete in this space. Only someone with the power of another Google can do it.

Bottomline: These companies will end up paying MORE than what they did to humans and with inconsistent results which fall below expectations. Who will they throw under the bus? AI? CEOs are cooked. But these slimy creatures will just shamelessly take their golden parachute and decamp, only to show up somewhere else to ruin another company

Hmm pay $100k to an experienced Steve, or pay $150k to an inconsistent Claude that needs supervision?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

---

Here are a bunch of women using adding machines to do bookkeeping for a large company. This is currently all done by one smart and experienced bookkeeper armed with excel and an online bookkeeping software package.

AI isn't going to replace everyone and do the job itself, it is just going to make smart people that work had that much more capable of doing a lot more work.

itsyourboypookie said:

---

I imagine it can do all bookkeeping entries really easy.

---

Not yet.

The models are getting there, though, and you can do 80% of bookkeeping with AI.

The paid-for specific services (think, one service for invoicing, one for payroll, one for revenue, etc.) are getting better day-by-day though, and will be close to 100% soon.

But, you will always need a human being to pull the trigger on payments, otherwise you are going to get hacked / scammed.

javajaws said:

---

The problem with today's AI - is that it isn't really AI. Its brute force computing. To get this type of "AI" smarter...means inherently raising the cost with more compute power. There are only so many tricks you can do to make this type of AI better without using more compute power. Costs will only really come down when we achieve AGI.

---

But then, what is AI? AI is just a weighted equation, like z = 4x+3y. Except that it has millions/billions of variables and weights.

So the brute force part is done during "training" in order to arrive at the equation. The using/generation part comes when it just runs the equation.

I am not familiar with AGI.

BusterAg said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

hahahahhah.

Corporate America has to choose: spend on AI tokens OR spend on humans.

Since I've been in this industry for decades and know how the human mind works, here is how it will play out.

Human labor cost is expensive, we all know that. AI has just come in and the 6-10 AI companies (no one gives a damn about the smaller pretenders) have the monopoly. They need adoption, so they are taking losses to keep prices low. Stupid CEOs compare this artificially low price and fire their staff and make big long-ass tone-deaf announcements on Twitter about how humans are useless and AI is better. Eventually the market is going to catch up and this bait-and-switch won't go on for too long. AI prices will go up as AI companies (Meta, Anthropic, Google etc) need to recoup the zillions they spend on it. Where that does that come from? From their customers. The ones who fired humans and are now slaves of AI. Now don't give me the usual "free market conservative" line that other companies will come in and prices will go down. No, that won't happen as it takes years and years and lots of money to compete in this space. Only someone with the power of another Google can do it.

Bottomline: These companies will end up paying MORE than what they did to humans and with inconsistent results which fall below expectations. Who will they throw under the bus? AI? CEOs are cooked. But these slimy creatures will just shamelessly take their golden parachute and decamp, only to show up somewhere else to ruin another company

Hmm pay $100k to an experienced Steve, or pay $150k to an inconsistent Claude that needs supervision?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

---

Here are a bunch of women using adding machines to do bookkeeping for a large company. This is currently all done by one smart and experienced bookkeeper armed with excel and an online bookkeeping software package.

AI isn't going to replace everyone and do the job itself, it is just going to make smart people that work had that much more capable of doing a lot more work.

---

I am not certain how your reply works with my post, are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?
Either way, I agree with your post.

I disagree with those idiots (mainly CEOs pimping AI products) who say AI will take over and "learn AI before it is too late" doomsday prophets. Fear mongering works well in social media psychosis to get views. There will be some disruption, some good and some idiotic, but we will reach a steady state in some time.

javajaws said:

---

The problem with today's AI - is that it isn't really AI. Its brute force computing. To get this type of "AI" smarter...means inherently raising the cost with more compute power. There are only so many tricks you can do to make this type of AI better without using more compute power. Costs will only really come down when we achieve AGI.

---

But like hph6203 noted, there is a crap ton of compute power available that's not being used. LLMs can run on regular CPUs. There is growing talk and development around using private/spare computer resources (like users' idle laptops, desktops, and GPUs) for LLM inference and even training.

That would be significantly cheaper than building and operating new centralized data centers, even after you pay home users for their electricity, hardware depreciation, and a profit (cash or perhaps tokens).

That would also solve the NIMBY DC issue.

The limitation will be electrons. We are shifting from a "compute hardware" problem to an "energy infrastructure" problem.

Logos Stick said:

---

Employees will start doing shadow AI, paying for their own subscriptions. It's like crack. Once you use it to minimize the work you have to do, you're hooked.

---

Yep, and no amount of corporate policies will prevent them from doing it. Once you use it and it makes your job easier, you're never going back, no one will do this.

lobopride said:

---

So when does the dot com crash part II happen?

---

I don't know why you think this will happen. Costs are increasing because demand has blown apart the roof and blasted into space. It's so far outstripped capacity that costs are blowing up. This is why capex from everyone is absolutely insane.

BigRobSA said:

---

I believe it.

Also, if corporate America would get smart, they'd cut the massive costs of numerous levels of "management" that have no intrinsic value: like managers, answering to managers, answering to managers, answering to a senior manager , answering to a director(s) , answering to Sr. Director(s), and so on....with several levels of VPs.

That's a **** ton of labor cost that can, and should, be cut before they cut the actual laborers making the product and/or "AI".

---

Amen...I was just talking about this the other day with a coworker...our company went through a merger and went from an org chart that made sense to an extremely top-heavy structure filled with managers making up extracurricular BS (on top of unnecessary meetings) to justify their positions. Was fun when they talked about having to limit raises last year when everyone deep down knows that they could cut 80% of upper management and we wouldn't skip a beat.

Quote:

---

I don't know why you think this will happen. Costs are increasing because demand has blown apart the roof and blasted into space. It's so far outstripped capacity that costs are blowing up. This is why capex from everyone is absolutely insane.

---

If there is an echo of the dot.com era, it is the historic splurge in CapEx to build out infrastructure that may deliver ROI in a few years or may deliver ROI a decade or more down the line. Every semi, box builder, data center operator, and cloud company is being awarded valuation multiples that paints them all as winners which we know is not going to happen.

It is no different than the glut of dark fiber and router and switching infrastructure that was laid down in the late 90s based on a massive overestimation of near term demand. Eventually streaming video and other products made sense of it all, but that came well after the original crop of first movers were bankrupt or trading at market caps 90+% below their dot.com level highs

Scott Galloway put it well with his AI math problem.

Windy City Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

I don't know why you think this will happen. Costs are increasing because demand has blown apart the roof and blasted into space. It's so far outstripped capacity that costs are blowing up. This is why capex from everyone is absolutely insane.

---

If there is an echo of the dot.com era, it is the historic splurge in CapEx to build out infrastructure that may deliver ROI in a few years or may deliver ROI a decade or more down the line. Every semi, box builder, data center operator, and cloud company is being awarded valuation multiples that paints them all as winners which we know is not going to happen.

It is no different than the glut of dark fiber and router and switching infrastructure that was laid down in the late 90s based on a massive overestimation of near term demand. Eventually streaming video and other products made sense of it all, but that came well after the original crop of first movers were bankrupt or trading at market caps 90+% below their dot.com level highs

Scott Galloway put it well with his AI math problem.

---

Yeah this is incorrect and obvious to anyone who is actually using AI continually as part of their job and didn't just use it 2 years ago and write it off. Demand is this high because it is that good.

This is unprecedented and there is no comparison to it outside of the Industrial Revolution and the invention of agriculture.

It can happen because the corporate side and funding of AI is divorced from the end user. Circular agreements of investing in your own customers, growth CAPEX at the proposed scale, and FOMO mindset ignoring actual business fundamentals can all absolutely trigger a set of dominos that have nothing to do with AI being used by millions of people.

Spergin said:

---

lobopride said:

---

So when does the dot com crash part II happen?

---

I don't know why you think this will happen. Costs are increasing because demand has blown apart the roof and blasted into space. It's so far outstripped capacity that costs are blowing up. This is why capex from everyone is absolutely insane.

---

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/article/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-expensive-since-the-dot-com-crash-130735624.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALopMEbeBTRCHhrPoF8tHTjX-vvNGDi8mXcvwIS8qBe2G75xOLVCBdaLWrrv2cPOmU7xqNZFV0Up7YkfCuG3gHWA6HnY7p-PmLP7vTDDRrq2nvjq1K1evJNU4exC5G2xEGfIcNDm85VG4ud5HlUOI5-FKBZ8WkeTwQO7KFphINT4

LMCane said:

---

Wildmen03 said:

---

So many companies are racing to be first, but they don't know why they are racing or what they are going to do once they get to the finish line.

---

aside from you typing this-

what actual evidence do you have to back up your claim.

because the Hyper Scalers are spending LITERALLY A TRILLION DOLLARS to push forward AI

but somehow you know better about the future of technology than the thousands of PHDs working at Google META AMAZON TESLA MICRON NVIDIA?

---

I'm just a random idiot on an internet forum. I know there are uses for AI but I'm also tired of paying inflated prices for hardware because of it.

At the end of the day all of these companies jumping into the AI pool with both feet seems kind of silly to me.

I have pivoted to AI is a bubble thanks to the persuasive capacity of Kyle Kuzma.

Ohhhh and also. Energy infrastructure. So many ai names, so many chip companies… need power output… safe bet🤝

— kuz (@kylekuzma) May 26, 2026

lobopride said:

---

Spergin said:

---

lobopride said:

---

So when does the dot com crash part II happen?

---

I don't know why you think this will happen. Costs are increasing because demand has blown apart the roof and blasted into space. It's so far outstripped capacity that costs are blowing up. This is why capex from everyone is absolutely insane.

---

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/article/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-expensive-since-the-dot-com-crash-130735624.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALopMEbeBTRCHhrPoF8tHTjX-vvNGDi8mXcvwIS8qBe2G75xOLVCBdaLWrrv2cPOmU7xqNZFV0Up7YkfCuG3gHWA6HnY7p-PmLP7vTDDRrq2nvjq1K1evJNU4exC5G2xEGfIcNDm85VG4ud5HlUOI5-FKBZ8WkeTwQO7KFphINT4

---

So? This is unprecedented. The only comparable events in world history are the invention of agriculture, the printing press, and the Industrial Revolution. Nothing else even comes close.

Spergin said:

---

lobopride said:

---

Spergin said:

---

lobopride said:

---

So when does the dot com crash part II happen?

---

I don't know why you think this will happen. Costs are increasing because demand has blown apart the roof and blasted into space. It's so far outstripped capacity that costs are blowing up. This is why capex from everyone is absolutely insane.

---

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/article/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-expensive-since-the-dot-com-crash-130735624.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALopMEbeBTRCHhrPoF8tHTjX-vvNGDi8mXcvwIS8qBe2G75xOLVCBdaLWrrv2cPOmU7xqNZFV0Up7YkfCuG3gHWA6HnY7p-PmLP7vTDDRrq2nvjq1K1evJNU4exC5G2xEGfIcNDm85VG4ud5HlUOI5-FKBZ8WkeTwQO7KFphINT4

---

So? This is unprecedented. The only comparable events in world history are the invention of agriculture, the printing press, and the Industrial Revolution. Nothing else even comes close.

---

"This time is different" the most dangerous words in investing

BigRobSA said:

---

I believe it.

Also, if corporate America would get smart, they'd cut the massive costs of numerous levels of "management" that have no intrinsic value: like managers, answering to managers, answering to managers, answering to a senior manager , answering to a director(s) , answering to Sr. Director(s), and so on....with several levels of VPs.

That's a **** ton of labor cost that can, and should, be cut before they cut the actual laborers making the product and/or "AI".

---

My latest company is probably one of the leanest I have seen. Fortune 50 in finance org and I had 3 people between me and the CFO. Moved to a new role last month and it is maybe 5. I was used to 10 or more levels of leadership elsewhere.

JUST IN - Trump appoints Pam Bondi to White House AI panel. Bondi will be tasked with facilitating coordination between the government and AI companies on the panel. Bondi will also serve in a newly established advisory role on national infrastructure. pic.twitter.com/zs4wMDPTI0

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) May 27, 2026

That's one way to kill AI!

Im Gipper said:

---

JUST IN - Trump appoints Pam Bondi to White House AI panel. Bondi will be tasked with facilitating coordination between the government and AI companies on the panel. Bondi will also serve in a newly established advisory role on national infrastructure. pic.twitter.com/zs4wMDPTI0

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) May 27, 2026

That's one way to kill AI!

---

Another field a woman is going to destroy.

I didn't know that AI can make sammiches.