WalterSear

Anthropic has stated that their inference process is cash positive. It would be very surprising if this wasn't the case for everyone.

It's certainly an open question whether the providers can recoup the investments being made with growth alone, but it's not out of the question.

Does your significant other know about your car collection? You may have a car hoarding problem.

You would have to make sure your search footprint supported that. IE - fully private, non-publicly-visible profiles everywhere.

Inference is cash positive: it's research that takes up all the money. So, if you can get ahold of enough users, the volume eventually works in your favour.

> starting to be demonstrably harmful

Starting?

This isn't that.

This is VCs FOMOing as global-economy-threatening levels of leverage are being bet on an AI transformation that, by even the most optimistic estimates, cannot achieve a tiny portion of the required ROI in the required time.

What it's transformational but takes a decade or so, instead of a year or so?

It's not like this isn't following exactly the same hype cycle as every other technological transformation.

VC isn't "getting back to it's roots", though it is certainly displaying one of it's fundamental drives: FOMO.

That too, is easier than ever.

It's just work, there's no secrets to it.

IMHO, there's never been a better time to build your own product and learn to sell it. The effort that AI implementation requires is clearly exponential to complexity of the organization.

You can build faster now that you ever have: I am building faster than I have in 25 years of engineering. You have more capable support for all the unfamiliar processes of building a business imaginable.

And almost everyone larger than you is finding it harder to achieve similar productivity gains from implementing AI, if not outright struggling with it. This is a golden moment and won't last long.

That was my first assumption, quite a while ago now.

I've claimed neither. I actually prefer restarting or rolling back quickly rather than trying to re-work suboptimal outputs - less chance of being rabbit holed. Just add what I've learned to the original ticket/prompt.

'Git gud' isn't much of a truism.