EpicAglet's recent activity
-
Comment on Drawbacks to Iceland having its own currency likely exceed the benefits, the country's Finance Ministry said, citing the conclusions of a government-commissioned report in ~finance
-
Comment on Who’s buying SpaceX and Anthropic? in ~finance
EpicAglet Link ParentI think the massive valuation is because of a bubble, yes. One that will necessarily pop at some point. And I am rather worried about what will happen to the global economy when it does. I am not...I think the massive valuation is because of a bubble, yes. One that will necessarily pop at some point. And I am rather worried about what will happen to the global economy when it does.
I am not sure what you mean by buffer. I can imagine some companies might keep some money they raise by selling stock as a war chest for when their stock price tanks and they are no longer able to raise money, if that's what you mean.
My expectation is that the crash comes some time after the main IPOs. So you might make a fair amount of money buying their stock, assuming you sell before the crash.
The core issue is that AI is just not worth as much money as people speculating think it is.
When LLMs started to become commonplace, people thought it would be huge and be everywhere. That made it very valuable. People were right. That is exactly what happened.
But the promises were bigger. It would dramatically change most industries. A lot of jobs would be replaced by AI. And other jobs would see massive productivity gains. If so, companies would pay fortunes for access to AI.
Some productivity gain for certain jobs seems to be there. Some jobs can be (partially) done by AI, though often with a lot of human oversight. The promised gain just doesn't seem to materialise, which pulls into question how much these AI companies can really earn in revenue. The tech seems quite far from changing this equation fundamentally.
Meanwhile, we've reached a point where marginal improvements in the capability of these models requires astronomical infrastructure investments. And this scales terribly, in the sense that the next step up is much larger still.
It seems like the scaling cannot go much further anymore until the world simply cannot invest more. That's the problem with this kind of exponential growth. The money they raise by going public means they can stretch this limit, but it’s still there.
Basically, while they can probably increase revenue significantly by changing how they monetize but nowhere near enough to justify a trillion dollar valuation. Meanwhile expenses are unsustainable. And even if they stop the hyper scaling, expenses are very high. So they will likely not have margins that are too great.
So very large and valuable companies, but much less that what they will be worth at the IPO.
Before the AI craze, the big tech companies were trading at a multiple of maybe 8× or 9× revenue for some. But those are highly profitable companies with high margins and a lot of growth potential.
OpenAI for instance is now estimated at 50× revenue. And it seems to me that they probably will end up trading at a multiple lower than Alphabet or Meta once the dust settles, due to their bottom line not being great even if they become profitable.
-
Comment on Who’s buying SpaceX and Anthropic? in ~finance
EpicAglet Link ParentI have some faith in the long term success of Anthropic. But to me it seems that clearly anything AI is severely overvalued atm, including them. I'm pretty confident it'll be like the dotcom...I have some faith in the long term success of Anthropic. But to me it seems that clearly anything AI is severely overvalued atm, including them.
I'm pretty confident it'll be like the dotcom bubble. A lot of companies died, but also a lot of the big players are still around today. A handful eventually reached that valuation again, years after the crash.
I think Anthropic has the potential to survive if they handle it well. Yet they'll crash hard along with everyone else. And the entire global stock market will probably suffer too.
Anyone with exposure to the stock market will probably lose a significant amount of money. But the AI stock will crash the hardest. And others will suffer in the recession that follows.
SpaceX probably will not go away either, but I believe they are targeting a 2 trillion USD valuation. Their total revenue is 20 billion or so. That's clearly just the AI bubble inflating the stock price like crazy, based on some fairy tale of datacenters in space. They too will crash hard.
Plus knowing Elon Musk, he will do whatever he can to inflate the price and cash out at the peak. He does not shy away from manipulating the market
-
Comment on Drawbacks to Iceland having its own currency likely exceed the benefits, the country's Finance Ministry said, citing the conclusions of a government-commissioned report in ~finance
EpicAglet Link ParentThanks. I tried that though. It seems like archive does not want to load for me. archive.is and archive.today don't load either. I assumed it's down for everyone, but maybe it's only for certain...Thanks.
I tried that though. It seems like archive does not want to load for me.
archive.is and archive.today don't load either.
I assumed it's down for everyone, but maybe it's only for certain users. I believe that has been the case in the past
-
Comment on Drawbacks to Iceland having its own currency likely exceed the benefits, the country's Finance Ministry said, citing the conclusions of a government-commissioned report in ~finance
EpicAglet LinkI can't read the article, but I assume it is the finance minister arguing in favor of adopting the Euro on EU membership? Good. From what I understood, the currency and fishing rights were the...I can't read the article, but I assume it is the finance minister arguing in favor of adopting the Euro on EU membership?
Good. From what I understood, the currency and fishing rights were the main reasons Iceland put the negotiations on hold. So that would make it significantly easier to join
-
Comment on OpenAI is preparing to file for an IPO in the coming weeks in ~finance
EpicAglet Link ParentFor sure. Not only do the investors cash out big time, it is probably the only way to survive the crash. I can see two possible moves here. Either they cash as much as possible during the bubble...For sure. Not only do the investors cash out big time, it is probably the only way to survive the crash.
I can see two possible moves here. Either they cash as much as possible during the bubble to build a war chest for after the crash. Which you then use to buy up all the competition afterwards, so that when the dust settles you monopolise the market. Or they try to ramp up spending big time, bet on the bubble lasting for a while longer, and try to outpace the competition.
Or a combination of the two of course.
Though I am leaning to the bubble bursting sooner, rather than later. So perhaps option 1 is better then. Yet from what I gather, Sam Altman owns a lot of stock in companies that OpenAI does business with more than of OpenAI itself.
So I'd also not be surprised if he will go for option 2, to personally enrich himself even if it means running OpenAI into the ground.
-
Comment on A random sci-fi question for you in ~talk
EpicAglet Link ParentI was curious, so I did some digging. On the Martian surface, the eq radiation dose is 0.64 mSv (source). This would put you at about 1.6 Sv for those 7 years. For an adult, the cancer risk...Of course, at our present level of technology, so would a stint in the Mars gulag. Unless I'm misremembering, Mars doesn't have a notable magnetosphere, so anyone stuck there is gonna pick up a hellacious dose of radiation unless the colony is pretty deep under the surface. That raises further logistics questions.
I was curious, so I did some digging. On the Martian surface, the eq radiation dose is 0.64 mSv (source). This would put you at about 1.6 Sv for those 7 years.
For an adult, the cancer risk coefficient after exposure to 1 Sv is 4.1% (source (table 1)). So if we crudely linearly extrapolate we get to about 7%.
This is of course not accounting for any shielding you may have due to the habitat, but either way we see that cancer is still far from guarenteed.
Though in reality you'd also need to account the trip there. On Mars, the atmosphere and the planet itself block a big part of the radiation. So the travel there would be a significant chunk if the radiation dose.
Then again, in this hypothetical scenario we have the technology to travel to a far-flung earth-like planet. So maybe none if this is all too relevant.
-
Comment on Anyone else a bit unnerved by the number of visible satellites? in ~space
EpicAglet (edited )Link ParentEvery single car built after a certain year also has cameras slapped all over it and are connected to the internet. They might not be recording you, but they totally could do that. Bonus points if...Every single car built after a certain year also has cameras slapped all over it and are connected to the internet. They might not be recording you, but they totally could do that.
Bonus points if you realize that the Chinese government now owns a big part of some of these companies and have a lot of influence over them. So they could turn on an extensive surveillance network in foreign countries if they so pleased
-
Comment on The zero-days are numbered — Firefox team uses AI to find and fix vulnerabilities in ~tech
EpicAglet Link ParentPlus I can totally imagine that the kind of vulnerabilities that AI creates, are also the type that agents intended to find vulnerabilities will more likely miss. So overreliance on these tools...Plus I can totally imagine that the kind of vulnerabilities that AI creates, are also the type that agents intended to find vulnerabilities will more likely miss. So overreliance on these tools could create a situation where the security is full of holes that is easy for a skilled person to find. But who knows. We are still at a relatively early stage in that sense
-
Comment on Survey reveals almost 50% of California teachers may quit teaching soon in ~life
EpicAglet (edited )Link ParentI mean to some extent it is true that they just want to feel appreciated. And the best way to show employees they are appreciated is by paying them more.I mean to some extent it is true that they just want to feel appreciated. And the best way to show employees they are appreciated is by paying them more.
-
Comment on NASA chief classifies Starliner flight as “Type A” mishap, says agency made mistakes in ~space
EpicAglet Link ParentExactly, I meant stop giving them contracts for things like Starliner. Boycotting them entirely would likely be counterproductive and probably illegal due to how procurements work. But perhaps one...Exactly, I meant stop giving them contracts for things like Starliner.
Boycotting them entirely would likely be counterproductive and probably illegal due to how procurements work.
But perhaps one route would be to put more stringent QA requirements and frequent audits as part of the contract on anything mission critical or anything Boeing is expected to apply. With the threat of fines worth much more than the value of the contract in case they fail. But I don't know what the contract looks like now of course, and to some extend I'd expect this to already be there.
More drastic measures would be something along the lines of the government pressuring Boeing to sack all of the upper management. But for that they'd need sufficient leverage first. Right now that doesn't seem realistic.
They'd need to start failing to the point they need a bailout or something like that. Or attempt to temporarily nationalise the company by buying them out. Or have the threat of suspension from federal contracts, but from what I understand (not a lawyer) they'd need to show something like criminal misconduct to suspend them. Or perhaps somehow force them to split off the parts that do the government contracts. That might help contain the rot.
Meanwhile, both Boeing and Airbus still have long order backlogs for the commercial airliners. So Boeing won't really feel the consequences much there anytime soon either. Even if in the future Boeing jets become worse than Airbus' and airlines start to favor Airbus. They simply won't be able to scale production up overnight. And Boeing still has years of orders on the backlog that they'd need to burn through.
If Boeing does end up declining, it'll likely be a very slow process I reckon. Unless something changes the equations a fair bit.
-
Comment on NASA chief classifies Starliner flight as “Type A” mishap, says agency made mistakes in ~space
EpicAglet Link ParentI suppose it shows how far the rot has spread within Boeing. It presents the US government with an interesting dilemma. On one hand, having a company like Boeing with this kind of engineering...Also Boeing... I guess I expected as much from them at this point but I thought they'd try a bit harder with the space side of things.
I suppose it shows how far the rot has spread within Boeing.
It presents the US government with an interesting dilemma. On one hand, having a company like Boeing with this kind of engineering knowhow within the US is important for national security reasons. On the other hand, if they are truly this dysfunctional, at what point do you need to stop giving them contracts like this.
But also for their airplanes. It is conceivable imo that they continue to decline and stop being competitive with Airbus in the future. If that happens, what should the government do? Prop them up to keep them from failing? Or let them fail, and become dependent on foreign companies for commercial airliners. Or should they intervene in a more drastic way?
I'm quite curious about what will happen to Boeing over the next few decades.
-
Comment on Amazon’s promotion of ‘Melania’ has critics questioning its motives (Amazon has spent 35M on marketing on top of its 40M budget) in ~movies
EpicAglet Link ParentPerhaps we should only look at liquid assets for the term millionairePerhaps we should only look at liquid assets for the term millionaire
-
Comment on Grok AI generates images of ‘minors in minimal clothing’ in ~tech
EpicAglet Link ParentThe world is absurd like that. What amazes me is that people elect this guy that became famous by being an ass on television. Then they act surprised when it turns out this guy is in fact an ass....The world is absurd like that.
What amazes me is that people elect this guy that became famous by being an ass on television. Then they act surprised when it turns out this guy is in fact an ass.
Or when he was caught on camera saying he grabs women by the pussy and was known to be a creep while owning child and teen beauty pageants. And then again people are surprised when he turns out to be a pedo.
Or that a guy known for tax evasion and shady business practices that only enriches himself might not be the guy you want to "drain the swamp". He loves the swamp so much he can tell Shrek get out of HIS swamp.
Or that a guy that went bankrupt not once, not twice but on six different occasions, might not have the best idea of good economic policy.
-
Comment on Grok AI generates images of ‘minors in minimal clothing’ in ~tech
EpicAglet Link ParentIt has teeth. It just leaves them on the nightstand at timesI wish we had an administration with some teeth.
It has teeth. It just leaves them on the nightstand at times
-
Comment on Falling price of cocaine forces drug traffickers to reuse narco-submarines, say Spanish police in ~finance
EpicAglet (edited )Link ParentBut then it doesn't really add up right? If your cargo is worth 60 mil, I can't imagine that they operate on such thin margins that the 600k is worth it. So if they are reusing these submarines...But then it doesn't really add up right? If your cargo is worth 60 mil, I can't imagine that they operate on such thin margins that the 600k is worth it.
So if they are reusing these submarines now, then either it's not because of the low prices at all or there is a part of the explanation still missing.
The article does briefly mention that they now refill the sub at sea. I wonder if it's more to do with that. That they now use a much bigger boat to transport it and only use the sub to bring it ashore. Then the point is that the load effectively just becomes much higher. Alternatively, you'd build bigger subs but perhaps that is technically challenging.
-
Comment on Airbus issues major A320 recall after flight-control incident in ~transport
EpicAglet LinkGlad they do this pro-actively. Intense solar radiation being able to corrupt data sounds like something that isn't likely to cause an accident but could. So it sounds to me like they are taking...Glad they do this pro-actively.
Intense solar radiation being able to corrupt data sounds like something that isn't likely to cause an accident but could. So it sounds to me like they are taking safety seriously.
-
Comment on Why humanity needs a Lunar seed vault in ~space
EpicAglet Link ParentI imagine it's less for a case of societal collapse but more for some catastrophe that somehow compromises the seed vaults on Earth. Some species of plants could end up extinct in that case, but...I imagine it's less for a case of societal collapse but more for some catastrophe that somehow compromises the seed vaults on Earth. Some species of plants could end up extinct in that case, but regular Lunar missions would then still be a thing. I guess this would mostly involve rare plant species.
It seems to me that the article tries to convince us that even the Svalbard vault is not as safe as we'd think and we are relying more and more on the seed vaults.
I like the idea, but it'll depend on how permanent the proposed moon base will actually be and how expensive such a Lunar seed vault would end up being.
-
Comment on Boeing's Starliner to return to International Space Station in cargo-only capacity for now in ~space
EpicAglet LinkIt still amazes me how far that company has fallen. You'd think that even if the commercial jets have some problems these days that the other parts of the company are unaffected, but it seems like...It still amazes me how far that company has fallen. You'd think that even if the commercial jets have some problems these days that the other parts of the company are unaffected, but it seems like no part of the company was spared. Is Boeing still good at anything at all?
-
Comment on AGI and Fermi's Paradox in ~science
EpicAglet Link ParentMaybe. I too feel like we are near a plateau with regards to the LLMs, so you might be right. At the same time, I'm not sure where you would go from there without more human produced data. Perhaps...Maybe. I too feel like we are near a plateau with regards to the LLMs, so you might be right. At the same time, I'm not sure where you would go from there without more human produced data. Perhaps obtained from the data the users feed it (which is probably already happening). I suppose that is similar to how humans learn, through interaction only on a larger scale.
But indeed that is assuming the core technology resembles the neural networks we are using now. Perhaps the tech would be fundamentally different if it ever will exist like you are suggesting. Then of course I agree. It might not resemble humans at all.
I was more thinking more of the idea of an LLM on steroids, since this is the context in which AGI is often discussed nowadays. The Silicon Valley companies seem to be pushing the idea that this is possible. Whether this is the case I think at minimum is highly speculative, and probably they just say that because it helps their stock price, but right now it's the closest thing we got.
Ultimately I hope we can agree that it just depends on how the tech works. If it is somehow more algorithmic and programmed, then it will be like you are sketching. If it is techology that somehow "learns", then it is a lot harder to predict and I believe it could develop to become more similar to humans.
Whether one scenario is more likely than the other I personally find hard to predict. Right now neural networks seem like the most likely route by far, but perhaps they can never get there. At the same time I don't know of any other technology that could.
So at that point the question becomes whether it is more likely that we can invent some way to make the current AI technology into an AGI, or that we can develop something completely different entirely to that end. Either way we are probably counting on some highly speculative technological leap. But then at least LLMs have the advantage that a lot of people are trying it and there's a lot of money available for it. Though I do agree that just scaling LLMs is probably not enough.
It loads again. So it appears that it was just down temporarily