Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more seydor's commentslogin

I think the main difference is, in liberal countries people depend on the media to manufacture consensuses, while China does not need anyone but the leader to create them. No society can survive without a certain degree of consensus

I believe it’s a mistake for liberal countries to rely on centralized content distribution platforms for consensus - that’s how you end up with consensus being for sale.

I would need to see an alternative before I can agree. There are other things tried on the margins, but so far none really seem better to me.

that's capitalism baby, look at sinclair broadcast group for example

Could be, I think the main point missing here is the independence of media from the state, wherever the place.

Don't the results of elections that are generally perceived to be fair give leaders a mandate that is accepted by most to do what they campaigned on?

> Maybe with 10 gigawatts of compute, AI can figure out how to cure cancer.

The growth in energy is because of the increase in the output tokens due to increased demand for them.

Models do not get smarter the more they are used.

So why does he expect them to solve cancer if they haven't already?

And why do we need to solve cancer more than once?


This is not an era for long-term effort. This is about moving very fast breaking things and growing as fast as possible , so that when it all goes bust you can still leave with a cushy fortune. This culture is everywhere now, from arts to business

We are way past peak LLM and it shows. They are basically advertise spacing heating as if it's some sort of advancement, while the tech seems to have stagnated, and they re just making the horses faster. The market should have punished this

It's 100% plausible and believable that there's going to be a spectacular bubble popping, but saying we are way past peak LLM would be like saying we were way past peak internet in 1999-2001 -- in reality, we weren't even remotely close to peak internet (and possibly still aren't). In fact, we were so far from the peak in 2001 that entire technological revolutions occurred many years later (e.g., smartphones) that just accelerated the pace even further in ways that would've been hard to imagine at the time. It's also important to note that AI is more than text-based LLMs -- self-driving cars and other forms of physical "embodied" AI are progressing at exponential pace, while entirely new compute form factors are only just now starting to emerge yet are almost certainly guaranteed to become pervasive as soon as possible (e.g., real AR glasses). Meanwhile, even plain-old text-based LLMs have not actually stagnated.

Sam Altman has called it a bubble already: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/18/openai-sam-altman-warns-ai-m... (Even a liar sometimes speaks the truth? I don’t know.)

  “You should expect OpenAI to spend trillions of dollars on data center construction in the not very distant future,” he told the room, according to a Verge reporter.

  “We have better models, and we just can’t offer them, because we don’t have the capacity,” he said. GPUs remain in short supply, limiting the company’s ability to scale.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sam-altman-admits-openai-tota...

So why would Altman say AI is in a bubble but OpenAI wants to invest trillions? Here's my speculation:

1. OpenAI is a private company. They don't care about their own stock price.

2. OpenAI just raised $8.3b 3 weeks ago on $300b valuation ($500b valuation today). He doesn't care if the market drops until he needs to raise again.

3. OpenAI wants to buy some AI companies but they're too expensive so he's incentivized to knock the price of those companies down. For example, OpenAI's $3b deal for Windsurf fell apart when Google stepped in and hired away the co-founder.

4. He wants to retain OpenAI's talent because Meta is spending billions hiring away the top AI talent, including talent from OpenAI. By saying it's in a bubble and dropping public sentiment, the war for AI talent could cool down.

5. He wants other companies to get scared and not invest as much while OpenAI continues to invest a lot so it can stay ahead. For example, maybe investors looking to invest in Anthropic, xAI, and other private companies are more shaky after his comments and invest less. This benefits OpenAI since they just raised.

6. You should all know that Sam Altman is manipulative. This is how he operates. Just google "Sam Altman manipulative" and you'll see plenty of examples where former employees said he lies and manipulates.


Altman wants OTHERS to spend trillions are GPU. He needs the scaling hype to continue so he can keep getting investors to put money in hopes of an AGI breakthrough. If there is no funding, OpenAI is immediately bankrupt.

>We are way past peak LLM and it shows

The dot com bubble saw crazy deals and valuations, followed by a crash.

some companies emerged from it and went on to be a giant company like Amazon. Let's hope this AI boom have some similar outcomes.


In hindsight, the dot com bubble was really the dot com dip.

There will be a great market correction soon. Long term though it’ll still have some value, much like after the dot com crash the internet still remained useful. I hope.

Though "Compute infrastructure will be the basis for the economy of the future" doesn't sound that off. LLMs may go but compute will live on. Bit like web portals and optical fiber.

> We are way past peak LLM

in the sense that all of the positive narrative is getting priced in.


They aren't really breaking encryption, more like banning it, right?

They are breaking the idea that you can have a private conversation without the government spying on you. The how doesn't matter.

The more times you can announce you "made a deal" , the better the TV ratings

And if you say "in two weeks", people - and the media - will forget and won't check up on it later.

They just remember you made something happen.


Well he was not wrong !

I would assume tech companies can easily launch research centers in India, no?

It s more than that. The fact that they did not conceal that they publicly coerced the tv station to fire him serves as a warning to other media.


It's more like, Meta gets people continuously wrong, like they did with metaverse. I dont think people like walking around with a teleprompter. At least when using a phone it's obvious what they are doing, and that's respectful.

Plus, i dunno, i hate glasses that's why i did LASIK and it was the best decision ever.


There's plenty of people who don't mind using their phone in a socially disrespectful way. Maybe they got it right.


People don’t walk around pointing a live phone camera and microphone at people. Facebook got it wrong.

It’s takes special kind of dbag that thinks it’s ok to wear a Facebook recording device on their face.


Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: