Commenters debate whether cost decline addresses competitive threat and terminology
4 Sep 23 11:02 AM · 2d ago · 2 comments · 1 source · development 4 of 5
Multiple Hacker News commenters push back on the report's framing. One argues that falling inference costs don't reduce competitive pressure from open models or rival AI companies; another questions whether the framing of 'buying intelligence' is accurate; a third asks whether increased token usage per task offsets per-token savings.
“I'm sure marketing will run with it though.”
_superposition_, Hacker News commenter · hn ↗
Alex Tabarrok Economist, Marginal Revolution bloggerEpoch AI Research organizationOpenAI AI company
The whole story articlespostscomments the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump
What was reported 1 claim about this development
-
first by HN Frontpage, 2d ago · also Marginal Revolution
What people said 4 voices · verbatim
-
Which reduces the price for hacking, which reduces the price of societal and technological rent-seeking aka parasitism, resulting in a unprecedented buildup of hatred on non-society contributing, extractive intelligence/parasitism.We are going to get lynchmobs hanging parasites and burning down data-centers before long.
-
Absolute BS, my experience is people are using this "intelligence" to do more dumb shit. I'm not seeing intelligence, I'm seeing unqualified people wielding power tools but they don't know any basic carpentry skills.
-
It may be true for text outputs, but it's absolutely untrue for other modalities: image, speech, voice, and embedding. Heck, embedding models haven't even been updated in years.
-
I love marginal revolution. But I'm not fond of the unit stated. I dont believe we're buying intelligence. I'm sure marketing will run with it though.
All 5 developments of AI inference costs plunge 725-fold in 18 months, Epoch AI… →
NewswiresHacker NewsMastodon