Right now, Kajabi is offering a free 30-day trial to start your business if you go to kajabi.com/modernmba 0:00 Modern Silicon Valley 6:42 Sponsor Break (Kajabi) 8:29 Post Dot-Com Beginnings 17:22 Data-Driven FOMO 28:19 Shovel Economics
Ai is not a hoax, its a legitimate field of science with decades of history spanning from the 1950s. AI can have real world consequences, boht good and negative, unlike, let's say, NFTs or IoT. These are, of course, have their own uses, but none are as revolutionary or transforming as AI, not even close. If this was true no one would care and no one would be affected by AI, same as no one was affected by NFTs, the impact on anything was minimal, AI is far bigger than that both in scope, potential and in implementation. There are good reasons as to why many top AI researchers (Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Stuart Russel and David McAllester just to name a few) are talking about existential risks stemming from advanced AI (AGI), many of them talking about it long before the current AI boom, you did not see that with crypto or NFTs or IoT or whatever it was. AI is different. We are building not a tool, but a tool maker an a tool user.
YOU DO FULL UNDERSTAND : That due to this Hoax and it's concurred Definitions.. We can not be certain This comment or your Video are not AI.. ALSO ALL HAIL AI AI IS ONE
@@Capital_Ideas1most miners didn't strike it rich during any gold rush. The best way to make money was to take advantage of the hype and open a saloon
Starbucks is confused about its precipitous loss of revenue in 2024? I'm not. I'll tell you EXACTLY why. Everything that was unique about the Starbucks experience - ordering a cup of coffee, perhaps a bakery item or a lunch (love their PB&J meal) sitting down on one of their comfy couches, propping my feet up and doing work on my laptop, or just browsing the Internet, or even just meeting a friend for coffee, all disappeared during the pandemic. They took out all the comfortable seating, removed the electrical plugs for your laptop, and replaced everything with low, long wooden tables, hard wooden stools with no backs to sit on, reduced the seating to almost nothing, and basically turned Starbucks into just another place to get an overpriced cup of coffee. The business model is now "Order your coffee by mobile app, come pick up your coffee, and get the f*ck out. Next in line, please!" Hell, I can just brew my coffee at home cheaper and have a more pleasant experience.
Starbucks in the Philippines are still a relatively comfy experience. Hell, there's been a recent controversy / debate that people are spending *too much* time in Starbucks here, doing things ranging from homework to *office meetings*
@@DirkAndDestroy Yup. They lost a huge portion of their main demographic of millennials and Gen z, plus their fastest growing markets in the Middle East, Indonesia & Malaysia took a big - for obvious reasons..
This video made me realize something for the first time. Every company is trying to use big data and/or AI to "understand the consumer", with the goal of trying to sell their crappy, overpriced product. So instead of focusing efforts trying to make a good product, for a reasonable price, they are trying to sell me their crappy product for as much as possible, and hope that AI tells them how to do that. I think customers are easy to understand - just don't rip me off man. No wonder most of them are failing.
Supply-side economics will never make us the big bucks if you keep messing with the supply through product differentiation by studying what the market wants - the rubes keep changing what they tell us they want, and we keep wasting money by changing the factory around. You get flush by focusing on demand generation for your cookie-cutter product.
I am a Data Scientist. I would like to chime in on this fascinating topic. I was a Software Engineer before I transitioned to Data Science. To me, the big scam is not AI it's BIG DATA. Does anyone know that through statistics, the difference between a sample and a population determines whether you think big data must be used or not? The reality is big data is NOT required, and let me say this again, big data is NOT required to generate predictive analytics. What is needed is TARGETED data and that is a big difference. Now you do in fact need some data but I can turn out a very compelling machine learning model using 100,000 records of data if I can get a sample size that represents the population. That is the key to reducing the overfitting of a ML model which is one of the most challenging aspects of developing a successful prediction model. You need to know the difference between a statistically significant SAMPLE which is the key to machine learning. So, if you don't know any better, you believe that you must spend thousands of dollars on some nonsensical cloud solution to host 100 million records of data for analysis. That is utter BS. Give me a distribution with a standard error of .01 to .10 and I will give you a VERY accurate ML model with less than 100,000 records.
Not to mention that corp leaders only SAY they make data driven decisions, when in reality, they use the data to support whatever their ideas are. No one has ever used data to prove themselves wrong when its something they want or believe.
Well, we have an existence proof that systems can learn without petabyte volumes of data, at only around 100 Watts continuous draw. 8 billion units shipped so far...
Your understanding is rudimentary at best. Tell me, what is a statistically significant sample from the distribution of all possible images? Image generation is based on sampling from the theoretical distribution of all possible images. Problems like this is beyond your 1800s statistics.
I worked in tech venture capital for 10 years. What I saw was a whole crop of “world changing” concepts that one by one, failed to change anything. But at the end of that ten years we were talking about a whole new idea of what was going to change the world next. I realized all that talk never got us anywhere.
What??? You haven't deployed it to cloud using the latest DevOps pipeline that disrupts the industry and touches lives? You're missing out on another $100 tr.
I was not expecting this video to strike such a chord with me. I've worked as a software engineer for over a decade, and I had this overwhelming feeling my job was complete bullshit for most of that time. We use bad technologies simply because they're popular, and most of the engineers don't really understand how computers actually work. The section about people being extremely tribal and only learning things because it pads a resume is 100% the truth. It's just a disgusting industry to be a part of if you have any integrity, just lies lies and more lies. I hadn't heard a great explanation of *why* it sucks to work in tech until I came across this video. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for making this.
The industry is large you know there are parts where none of that happens and people just solve business problems with technology and provide real world value.
I for one wonder if Google and its subsidiaries (or Alphabet, or whatever their nom de scam is currently) simply decided to turn everything over to the AI (customer service, tax evasion, they're still doing one of the two, probably. Almost forgot 'reducing their accountability' and 'expediting their enshittification.'🙄) They themselves may have disappeared. Try recovering your password sometime, if you enjoy aggravation.
@@Fe22234 Will agree, i've worked for some of the companies mentioned in this video.... so maybe my opinion is biased, but i've seen big data, and AI provide real value. Maybe not the orders of magnitude of value promised.... but there is a signal, it's not all noise.
I just need to log into Amazon to see that even one of the worlds biggest companies with sheer endless data fails to increase my spending. No matter how many targeted ads I see I wont buy stuff I dont need. And I dont need a lot.
They don't understand their own data. They thought I wanted to buy Leeks aka Spring Onions for months and showed me advertisements for Supermarkets with pictures of Spring Onions. Because I searched for the virtual singer Hatsune Miku and Spring Onions are her gimmick item. There is tons and tons of Hatsune Miku merch and they just showed me Spring Onions.
Rory Sutherland makes an interesting point about this: despite all the data being collected about you from every website, personalised advertising has largely failed. Online ads are 99% irrelevant to me. They can predict my demographics and some topics of interest. But heck, even TV and magazine ads could do that. There is none of the hyper-personalisation that's been prophesied for 30 years, that the machines would understand my preferences better than I do. Same with content recommendations from Facebook, Spotify etc. They also cannot predict any new things I might be interested in based on my personality. They just just shovel more of what I've once interacted with. That reminds me of another relevant Rory quote: "All big data comes from the past."
hard disagree. The spotify daily mixes are spot-on and I discover music I like mostly through them. Personalized experience can be really good if done right. And have you ever noticed how when talking about black dildos with your phone on the table, the next time you unlock it google and facebook feeds are filled with ads for sex shops around? that's personalized targetted ads off of spying on you in real time. What more do you want?
Agreed. Three years, me and the rest of the tech team were sitting around a table with the CEO of my company trying to explain why there was no practical reason for us to try and shoehorn blockchain into our tech stack or daily operations. The overall theme here isn't that AI is useless, it's that these hype cycles rarely deliver the results they promise and mostly serve as a way to prop up tech companies and boost valuations.
@@realhet there is a fun sleight of hand that always goes on if you're someone who's into economics/business because you get to enjoy watching companies explain to shareholders how a new thing will bloodsuck users (see google explaining how they are making search worse to maximise ad clicks), while they are telling users how amazing the new thing will be for them
Moments like these i am so happy to have gone for Electrical Engineering and NOT Software engineering/Computer science. Instead of being stuck in that crazy world, I work for a modest company that has been creating Bio-medical laboratory equipment based on a novel way to indent at a nanoscopic scale. Basically It uhm... Pokes cells and measures how springy they are. It doesn't sound exciting, but its Tech how it should be: Not some big-data harvesting boom&bust cycle, but novel inventions furthering society and science
I am a software developer with a CS degree. I make tools for staff planning and shift communication on mine sites. There are still real jobs for people with software degrees.
Not everyone who has a CS degree works at big tech (or in other words, companies like Palantir). That's a big misconception. I work in the Data Center industry and have a BS in CS and a MS in Systems Engineering.
@@bipl8989 For coders, I like using the term developer rather than engineer. For engineering, I like referring to traditional engineering roles. CompE, System Engineering, PetroEng, Electrical Engineering, ChemE, MechE, CivilE, etc. Roles that still include physical work.
@@adamasimolowo8285 Yes. Software developer is more correct. And sorry. I meant engineer in the American connotation, as in design engineer. Very little physical work involved, maybe punching the elevator (lift) button to get to my office. The British tend to group plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, anyone that can hold a wrench or screwdriver to be engineers. In the USA, engineers have a uni degree, except maybe for a train driving "engineer".
The funniest part of all of these hype cycles is watching people jump from one hyped up product to another. Crypto, Ai, drop shipping, ChatGPT, and the rest. I like how they always insult others for just being rational about the technology being useless or, at the very least, not good enough as it is. They just forget the broken promises of the last piece of tech and jump to the next one.
I absolutely agree about hype cycles. Do these things not perform though? Crypto hits new highs pretty often. Most students use ChatGPT even if they won’t admit it and it’s pretty dang new.
Corporations are so eager to be first to market with things like AI that they don’t spend enough time upfront to understand how it can actually fit in and drive value for their brand. Just release the AI deck and we’ll figure it out along the way. It’s bad.
This is a new massive development in the marketing and business of tech these days. You are right. It’s bad. Why provide a fully complete product when you can continue to develop AFTER its sell.
I saw this/these approaches to product development since 1990. I concluded the winner was almost always the worst product with the best and latest marketing strategy. Have the idea then the market strategy, start the selling then the build product. And that is what the western world does all the time. Not a care for any damage done as long as it can show the biggest number. All the share traders follow. If you are wondering why/how China out competes, have a think about communist-capitalist method. The problem of thinking only in dollars, is, you forget what you are doing.
My boss : Can AI help us with anything ? Me : After reviewing all our technological needs, I've seen one use case for machine learning for this QC task, but it costs so much that the ROI will be virtually never. My take as a software engineer is that we should always do low tech if it can be done with low tech. Over engineering everything and using AI and sophisticated sensors when a simple limit switch could do the job is what people do when they can't find how to make their skills really useful. There is no need in selling BS when you do good work. But hey, that's what makes me a worker instead of a billionaire con artist. Maybe some people take more pride in being rich than being useful, what do I know.
As a former data scientist its funny to hear so many companies talk about how they thought thier data would be a game changer. Most companies didn't realize the limitations of thier in house data sets and didn't realize that they were collecting useless info. They didn't realize how they needed to collaborate with competitors and other companies in order to have robust data that would actually be useful. But even in doing all that I think the inherent issue with relying on data is that it looks at the past to predict the future which will always be faulty
Data scientist here also, usually data doesn't give better result than someone thinking critically. Most often our job was to backup their idea with data, or change narratives to looks good for the investors. Problem with big data you can derive whatever result you want. Most often useless.
@@MultiHeheboy Jeff Bezos actually says this, does anecdotal information back up the data, is the hypothesis backed by the data or is the data leading or lagging the actual experience. Let's be honest, Big data boils down to a bar chart in a spreadsheet. It's never going to be anything more than that.
@@MultiHeheboy Also as a Data Scientist I will disagree somewhat as there are always problems that people don't know the answer too which we use data to understand. However that usually comes with a lot of time and testing which is more the science of data science which you rarely have in a for profit business. I've also seen way too many times people suffer from decision paralysis when they have a lot of data. The use of data needs to match the business so shoving big data into a small company will overwhelm them and provide any executive with an unfiltered stream of data at a big company will drown them too.
The most infuriating thing is even if is possible take a result usable from the data, companies disregard the results because is not the answer they want
I knew it was a roast when I watched Altman telling an audience of Arabs from Dubai that open AI will need 7 trillion dollars for infrastructure funding...because if you're gonna use your AI to troll for money you may as well follow its advice/hallucination.
overhyped is way different from dead, "AI" (pretty meaningless umbrella term) has been used to great success for years ..Let me ask you: do you think machine translation is dead? Facebook recommendation algorithm might have issues but it serves its main purpose of maximizing user retention. And so on. I would say it's the opposite of dead because even if a fraction of a % of that AI money goes to actual research, it's still a win
@matsiv5707 you are 100% correct (not sure of win as it's usually a win to a tiny few) but these videos are coping mechanisms. They are Chamberlain meeting with Hitler and assuring everyone there is nothing to worry about. Too many companies are using A.I as a meaninless term like when everything was "green". Doesn't mean A.I. isn't going to start affecting your life just like Big Data is affecting your life even if you aren't aware of it.
TBF, washing machines probably started this, "AI" washing cycles were an on-and-off marketing point since the late 80s. (back then that meant fuzzy logic)
I was told by a CTO that my proposal to cut IT department expenditure by over 50% at our company by moving away from those Tribal providers, was DOA b/c when this company failed everyone had to get another job and having those ‘industry standard’ solutions on their resume was the only way to do it. Company went bankrupt about 18 months later. But to his credit we all did get other jobs.
Hey wall street tech analyst here, love the channel. One of your earlier videos actually cited/displayed a chart I had created many years ago and I thought that was kinda cool. My team tested numerous consumer AI services, and none of them could produce text I would consider publishing in one of my reports. The question is 1) who is making money on AI currently? The answer is Nvidia, but this is hardware used to enable AI services. The software services themselves are a much harder value prop and people/companies are balking at pricing. OpenAI has decent revenue from the early-adopter crowd. Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft....biggest names in tech and nobody is seeing surging revenue, nobody is seeing rapid margin improvement from AI. The other question is 2) why is Nvidia making SO MUCH MONEY selling its chipsets? The answer is because Alphabet, Meta and others are spending literal effing BOATLOADS of cash on AI infrastructure. Again, the smartest names in tech are spending like drunken sailors to upgrade their servers to accommodate Nvidia's AI chipsets, under the premise that these AI server farms will power the surging AI compute needs of the future. Look at the Capex spending of the large tech giants, and they are all doing the same thing, they are pouring cash into AI investments chiefly by purchasing Nvidia chipsets like the H100. It's also not a coincidence that having a huge number of H100s is great for attracting and retaining talent. I do believe in the ultimate promise of AI but we are not there yet.
People are forgetting that every revolutionary technology has taken a decade (usually longer) to mature and make a real difference. Trains, electricity, computers, and the Internet all had a decade or more of being in a "useless" state after invention.
Dell stock dropped 33% after just saying AI, AI, AI for three straight months and then investors realizing they couldn’t show any revenue for their products. Money talks, BS walks.
This is so true. Having been in AI since 1986, all the hype reminds me of the DotCom bubble of the early 2000s. Yes, AI can change things, but not everything and we still have a long way to go. We have business people who know nothing about AI besides what they read in an airline magazine and AI developers who just want to play.
I work with AI quite a bit in my work. More specifically, machine learning algorithms for material discovery and simulation. Doing actual AI work is computationally expensive, and can takes many many trials to get right. AI in itself is a very old technology from the 60s, and is really nothing special. Marketing has turned it into something it isn't, and gives investors the wrong impression of what it can do. You need lots of high quality data to train any ML algorithm. And the reality is that there is way too much data that is just pure junk to produce algorithms for most purposes. Case in point, GPTs are terrible at managing serious cases in medicine, law, and scientific research. They get fundamental facts wrong, ignore crucial concepts, and reach conclusions that are hilariously false. Much more work needs to be done before these algorithms are publicly available. But we've jumped the gun.
Part of the reason they get those fundamentals wrong is its' own rabbit hole. You would be shocked at how much of the sciences have been polluted by capital investment and the MAFIA ring that the journals themselves are. Education as a for-profit venture has caused immense harm to us all, its just hidden beneath the veil.
Why shouldnt they be publicly available? Despite any issues that can come up people are responsible for what theyre consuming. I use chatgpt to assist in coding but only to an extent. Its not always right of course but it sometimes has great ideas on how to solve an issue.
As a computer programmer that has since the 1980's seen dozens of fads come and go I completely agree. We programmers will continue to do all the work and the talking heads will chatter about whatever their latest misunderstanding about technology is. Some fads are incorporated into day-to-day programming work but most just fade away into oblivion.
AI will not fade into oblivion. And programming as we know it today will be gone the same way programming in machine code and punch card disappeared. Telling machines what to do and bureaucracy will stay.
@Isinlor unless LLM become deterministic, they will never replace programmers. It's absolutely stupid to use a tool which makes shit up. Compilers ans high-level languages are valuable because they always provide the same result given the same input. LLM just do whatever they want. Make deterministic LLM as opposed to probabilistic, but then they suddenly stop being so "powerful" anyway, because there are fundamental limits to their learning abilities.
@@yds6268 LLMs are 100% deterministic. Come one, they are programs as much as compilers. Sampling from LLMs is pseudorandom. It is programmers that are not deterministic. But it is completely besides the point. Determinism of the process producing code has nothing to do with correctness of the code itself. LLMs can use compilers. LLMs can write short programs. LLMs struggle with novel algorithmic problems and excel at boilerplate. LLMs are not good yet at managing whole code bases. But it was just 4 years ago that you couldn't get foo bar program from an LLMs like GPT-2. GPT-3 managed foo bar, but struggled with pig latin. Now GPT-4 handles good chunk of my daily work. Refactoring - done. SQL queries where I can't remember syntax - done. API I don't know - done.
What irritates me the most in every modern Silicon Valley and Big Tech story is that hardly anybody ever remembers the people who actually build the hardware that runs all this crap. The humble engineers and technicians working in crystal growth, epitaxy, photolitography, thin film deposition, chemistry, etching, packaging etc. Assuming that they weren't laid off when the manufacturing plant was moved to China, that is
Most people don't know what all that stuff is. The people who work on that stuff don't know how their work is applied and integrated with other technologies and ultimately used to drive monetization.
yeah the semiconductor industry hasn't moved to China. its still very profitable and mostly in Taiwan (as it has been for decades). if anything, there is more semiconductor manufacturing and other components of that supply chain being built in Europe, South Korea USA, and Japan. those jobs aren't going to China. governments understand the value of the semiconductor industry and the US has a lot of power over where those chips can be produced and who can produce them. China is trying (and mostly failing) to build their own domestic semiconductor industry. its a shadow of the one that exists outside of china. As the US and west obviously have no desire to let China in to this massive market and especially since it's value to the rest of the global economy is so large. it's also arguably not an industry that can be built from top to bottom within a single country.
@@e2rqeylmao china failing? They are literally leepfroging in progress, you arrogance is exactly what these people did when they thought they could snag the market with some gimmick , china literally banned amd and intel chips recently and is slowly gaining the market
as an engineer working in tech industry I can't find any more accurate video describing the tech space. Just follow what ever trend, slap it in your resume, find a job with a good salary, and move on to next trend and do the same thing over again At the end of the day no one cares about the tech itself we just want to put food on the table
hasn't tech just always been this way though? i got the impression in the video he was acting like it was a relatively new thing... I feel like what he's been describing in tech has been going on for decades now
@@ayy479 This is kinda new. Tech was mostly about hardware. It's only in the last 20 or so years that the center of gravity has shifted towards software. It's hard to overhype hardware. Your thing either works or it doesn't. You can't really get away with tricks. With software, you can make all sorts of promises because it's virtually impossible for any one to look under the hood and confirm what you're saying. Amazon had AI self checkout that was actually being operated by workers in India. I remember some other handyman app valued at 1b that pretended to have a sophisticated algorithm matching users to handymen when all the matching was actually being done by underpaid freelancers in the Philippines. Same with ChatGPT's data. Freelancers in the 3rd world are getting paid a couple of bucks a day to label data and review output for accuracy. The algorithms are nowhere near as advanced as Big Tech wants us to believe. You can't get away with that kind of bullshittery in any other industry. The likes of Google and Facebook plus widespread smartphone adoption are what fueled the software hype. A lot of the success of the likes of Facebook or Instagram may just be a matter of luck but you can't sell luck to investors. You have to package up a different story and sell that.
So you're still using Fortran and COBOL??? or did you cave in and start "following trends" like the rest of us to "just to slap it in your resume and find a job with a good salary"?
“When in a gold rush, sell shovels” and so because of that, in 2024 we’re in a gold rush where 9 out of 10 participants are shovel sellers with the other guy actually mining gold but prt time because their real job is also selling shovels
@ModernMBA bro we need the porn industry explained. Before and after the internet. Ive always heard that its a multi-billion dollar industry but have always asked "whos paying for it?" Clearly the actors aren't earning it? One could say the free websites are earning it from ad revenue but are that many people clicking on fake personal sites?
“Everything will be made of steel.” -Thomas Edison “Cleaning the house will require only a hose.” -Waldemar Kaempffert “Cars will be able to drive themselves.” -Elon Musk
Thomas Edison was a part owner of the concrete company that supplied concrete for the Panama Canal. He also advocated for mass-produced concrete houses.
Exactly, 10 years ago Elon Musk guaranteed that in 5 years his cars would be self driving and Tesla owners would be making money by using their self driving cars to make automatic trips, making them a fantastic investment. This was all BS, but some people still believe him.
I've worked at a couple of the companies you discussed. They collect a lot of data but the analyses tend to be either superficial and uninteresting or fabricated/relying on questionable assumptions. Most big decisions I've see are "finger to the wind" but they say "data" because that makes it seem more impressive.
“Let’s just assume we will have 4% usage next year” “It’s been between 0.8 and 1.2 for the last 4 years” “Oh… let’s call it between 2 and 3% then.” This is the daily struggle of being someone that actually gives a -- in a charlatan industry.
I think every business should adopt an "is this bullshit" officer position on their senior management team. Job description: everytime someone pitches a new tech solution that no one here really understands the ITBO must write a detailed report about how the proposed whatever is kind of bullshit
You need a better name for the position, something like: Strategy Implementation Officer. It's the fancy way of saying "How does this shit fit in here" guy
The problem is that novel ideas build hype and improve company evaluations. If every company implements AI but Google, then Google's stock prices drop.
That's the job of the CEO/the consultants they hire. The reality is, even if a position like this literally existed, much like the way a court jester may have told his king about truths that he would rather ignore, they will inevitably be swept up in politics. The reality of whether something is a good idea or not matters less than who's proposing it. If they got in the way of a major initiative of someone influential enough, that person will likely force some kind of drama to play out and kick the "Chief Bullshit Officer" out. There's no solution within the framework of current corporate governance to solve this issue IMO.
we have been conflating "progress" with the tech industry. but how much progress has tech really achieved? we are not as far in the future as we'd like to think
I agree. I remember life b4 modern tech(im 45). It wasn't that much different. In fact I think the convenience of tech is offset by the inconvenience of managing and maintaining tech now. (Passwords, cpu errors, internet connections, software updates, etc...). It takes so much effort to make the tech work correctly its like we work for the computers now.
@@steplu2916I think ocean & space exploration also qualifies as (technological) progress, despite not having famine erradication as a goal. The latter is a political/administrative issue, not a technological one. It can be erradicated without requiring any new piece of tech, but there is no political will to do so.
My business partner and I bought into the idea AI could assist us. What we ended up finding out is that using AI as a wiki was no better than asking people to read the wiki. We had to train the AI how to read the data and provide the correct response only to find out that we also had to train it to understand certain terms, abbreviations, that we were raising an infant. It was torture. The AI would respond to simple questions with wrong information. Grabbing info from one part and sharing that info to our employees, confusing literally everyone.
@@plaidchuck this was an off the shelf AI software called Guru. Its not my responsibility to hire better developers. That’s a strange assumption to make.
I'm curious if you stuck to it in the end. Since you already trained it as if you hired a freshie anyway, and the difference is this freshie is cheaper and will never quit.
@@yunowhatitis6783 we do still have our account and we’re deciding whether it’s a sunk cost or if we should get rid of it. It really is a nightmare because of the amount of time you have to spend training the AI. Even after you train it, it still finds ways to unlearn what you’ve taught it and will respond the same wrong information you’ve already worked on. Much like a real employee. Bear in mind, it’s not a big savings if every single time you want to teach a new thing, your most expensive employees (ownership or management) is struggling to figure out how to get the AI to share the correct information. We would almost rather setup a paid video onboarding process which we were quoted $3,000 for up to 3 roles. Thats pretty competitive over time.
Keep in mind that whether or not big data is actually useful for a company is not something you can publicly verify. Corporations use big data to analyze their customer base and recommend products to them to hopefully persuade them to buy. The impact of that is already hard to estimate internally, for outsiders it's downright impossible. It's similar to estimating the impact of advertisement, which can also be tricky.
In some cases its pretty easy to estimate internally. Amazon's recommendation algorithm is driven by data, Uber's route planning, Facebook's newsfeed, Netflix's recommendation system, Google's search algorithm...all of these are based on AI and big data. To argue that it's not effective is ridiculous. What's not effective is attempting to layer data and AI on top of a flawed business model, particularly one that only really survived in a 0 interest rate environment and has no hope of profitability. That's not an indictment of AI or big data, but of companies that raise money on hype.
@@kangaroomax8198 Ding ding ding this is the right answer. Surprised that an "MBA" channel didn't point that out but I guess it doesn't get as many clicks as "unga bunga ai bad big tech bad"
@@plaidchuckOf course an MBA wants to sell you the idea that you can make business decisions on intuition alone, it's the only value they bring to a company.
@@kangaroomax8198 to be honest i do believe in data and AI however i believe it will not be able to do what it promised to do. i think humans will probably still work and it will just become advanced tools.
I'm a dishrag developer in a big non-tech company. The last 10 years have just been failed buzz word after failed buzz word. I just laugh and thank the plant workers for their service. I was in a CEO company meeting; He mentioned AI, I laughed and left the meeting. We are millions in on stupid.
Regarding big data, it's not so much that it provides so much benefit, it's just mostly required now for any medium sized tech company. Imagine youtube, netflix or google without sophisticated recommendation algorithms, that's big data in action. It's just that very few companies actually have such a strong relationship with their customers that they would need something like that.
There are millions of delusional companies that think they have big data because they have a 1Gb Excel spreadsheet. I'm not kidding. Similarly there are going to be millions of companies that think they are doing AI because they asked ChatGPT something 🤯
@@tikkivolta2854 AI isn't that smart. AI doesn't have access to a pool of knowledge of mankind, and even if it did, there are more junks in there than not, and AI couldn't tell whether something is objectively true or not. It's no doubt good at language applications, like correcting spellings and grammar, but anything where natural facts are involved, they failed consistently. If they can't do that properly, then I wouldn't put my faith into AI being able to solve business failure.
@@mickeyg7219 i recently cracked a real life legal case with it in 28minutes. i don't know what you expect from it in its current autistic state, but from where i sit "it" doesn't have to be smart, it's just a tool that helps me to perform at 800%. and although i get the pessimistic view on diminishing returns, i can see us nowhere near it. and again: even if we stopped right now, i am able to optimize the heck out of my biz.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I recently saw someone mention that the way these tech startups and trends are being shoved down our throats, eventually people will return to more in-person interactions. Online shopping feels worse, and searching for anything online is getting worse too. I feel inclined to agree, it’ll be slow but I already notice myself moving away from buying everything online
One can hope so, because I agree that face-to-face interactions and physical experiences are better than digital ones, but with the internet infrastructure that's been built up now, doing everything online is just easier than doing it in person. And when one option is easier than another, you can expect people to take that one more often.
I concur! I have been detethering from the internet and all the redundant stupidity of digital life to look for more physical interactions. I once believed that humans could evolve into connected cyborgs through implantation. Now I have u-turned completely and look forward to more sustainable and rustic ways
i disagree, if i'm buying anything beyond groceries such as electronics, appliances, whatever other relatively big-ticket items there's always some bullshit artist salesman pushing me to buy shit i dont actually need, just like online advertising. shopping in general just sucks be it in-person or online.
Nah. Using the issues present in micro loans or D2C business models with low customer return rates to discredit and entirely unrelated product development is nothing short of retarded. Guy needs to retake econ101
i was listening to this in the background and watched a whole 7 minute ad for some innovation company because i thought it was being quoted as part of the video 💀
@@allanshpeley4284imagine thinking RUclips premium would do anything to a content creator, you're better of donate that money to the CC than YT itself.
@@GackFinder Shhhhh... Let them have it. Imagine that everyone starts to use adblock. Then corporations will fight it really hard and we'll be forced to watch ads. So let it be :)
Outstanding critique. Having worked at more than one of the companies mentioned, I unfortunately can confirm that this is mainly a shell game, similar to a bunch of kids pretending to be running a grocery store, but doing far more damage and with much less intelligence or charm. As a user experience designer, I've been grilled at how 'customer obsessed' I was, but then told that there was no reason for any of us to talk to any customers or users. I've worked at 'data-driven' places that kept no data on their operations. Often, these companies hire talented people - not to make useful products, but to have them create digital potemkin villages that will hopefully get a little more money from investors, while remaining clueless about real value creation (let alone ethics) Thank you for mentioning how this also hurts employees. One of the worst parts of being a manager in these places is seeing the confusion, anger, and disillusionment among my reports. As the Italian proverb says, "If you can't find the reason for something, the reason is money." Your video cuts through the hype and shows that much of tech is a scam.
This. AI/ML as a technology works; I mean, I found this video via YT's recommendation, which is a proof that their recommendation system works. The technical people involved (software engineers, data scientists) are doing their job. Now, companies not making money off this new technology falls on the executives and businessmen, who are clearly not doing their job. Which makes the entire premise of this video (a guy that calls himself Modern MBA saying that AI is a hoax) ironic.
What about the masses of people who will follow the blind off a cliff before they would ever admit they were totally wrong, like @Travolta12e, above my comment? They're just as guilty if not more so, just not as charismatic, which is why they're attracted to snake-oil salesmen like a moth into a flame and will defend their irrational decisions any way they can. ANYTHING but admitting fault.
@@Travolta12e This video isn't saying that none of the tech works. It's that billions are being poured into this tech but the fundamental business value seems to be missing. Saying Chat GPT works is half true, but so what? How is the money it costs to develop and run this AI being justified in actual business results? Silicon Valley has been doing a lot of innovation for its own sake.
I work for an off highway equipment manufacturer. I remember in 2019 a new ceo came in and suddenly he said we were a technology company and data was going to take us into the future. Interesting.
You nailed it perfectly. As a developer, it s really difficult to not play this game. Cloud platform owners transform software in a monopoly where they define all the rules for their own profits. They own the machines, the computing power, the tooling and services, the stores, and often the data. They obviously win this game, it s nearly impossible to innovate outside the scope they define. Corporations have never been so powerful. We are going to the opposite promises of the beginning of personnal computer era and dev. It s sad, i thought it would be different than other big industries evolution but it s not.
Really good paper, can't believe how well it holds up even today. He even talks about AI in that paper, and all of it is spot on. Crazy how its from the 80s
Putting this into historical perspective, it's worth considering Amara's Law, that the impact of new technologies is overstated in the short term and understated in the long term. Similarly, the lack of productivity gains visible from big data today is analogous to that visible from the expansion of computers noted by Robert Solow in 1987. Most likely those gains only come quite some time after the initial investments, when new revenue streams outstrip the initial overenthusiastic and inefficient investments, and when cost savings come from optimising processes to use new technologies efficiently. This takes decades, perhaps a generation or more. It's also worth noting that gen AI is built on big data, so more a development of it than its replacement.
This. And what happens if the data is garbage, or not actionable? One way to think of it - does the Netflix or RUclips algorithm really push videos you want to see? Or mostly complete garbage? AI has gotten much better at addiction. And not much esle.
@@joeytmandudeexactly, big data is essential that's why all big companies adopted it, not because it's just hype lol. The hype can last for a couple years then it dies. Big data analytics and insights have become so mainstream and commonly used that they're not even mentioned anymore because they're not a differentiator + because AI is taking the big data and creating knowledge from it
The only story I see actually being told here is that the quantity of data was the issue for startups. Now the large corporations are actually leveraging it, and executing on it by screwing consumers in the most small ways they can.
I tried Pandora back in the day, their "suggestions" were more like a radio station playing the same songs over and over, rather than taking into account what song styles I tried to steer it towards. So I switched to Spotify before they were officially in the US. I could make my own playlists, and the quality of stations based on my tastes were far more diverse and superior.
I'm gonna guess this video originally had "Big Data" in its working title but like the companies it criticizes, it decided to use AI instead to get more attention.
I think itll be more like the internet where most companies fail and pushed too hard too early but the stuff that comes out of it will be revolutional.
@@o1-preview The problem with that comparison is that many, many other technologies OTHER than the internet have been trialed and failed during the same period at the internet.
Thank you for this video! ... A couple years ago, everybody went nuts for the Metaverse, and that flopped. 5-to-10 years ago it was Big Data, "the cloud," blockchain, etc. 10-to-15 years ago it was Chinese tech stocks that are now mostly seen as junk, and every app under the sun... Yet the largest internet search provider is still Google, the biggest social media network is still Facebook/Instagram, the number 1 smartphone maker is still Apple, the biggest e-retailer is still Amazon, and Microsoft is still as huge as they ever were. A lot of the "trends" ignore that almost every sector of tech is a monopoly or duopoly, and the largest players haven't really shifted since the internet was created, and the personal computer in the case of Apple/Microsoft.
Do you know how those companies operate? They are Manufacturers, they have distributors and distributors have service providers. Every Big Corporation that you mentioned helps thousands of smaller companies.
Spotify has introduced me to many new songs and bands but then I find myself at a coffee shop and hear those exact songs playing there as well. Some of these songs are several years old. That’s the extent of what AI can do in my mind - find 100 or so overlooked songs from the past and feed it to the appropriate segments. It’s not a business it’s just a feature like any other feature.
In my opinion, term MARKET is opposite of term INTELLECT. Intellect requires transparency. Market thrives on obscurity and obfuscation after stopping paying dividends
Got to love the juxtaposition between the slick, keyword-laden voices of the Silicon Valley prophets with the straight-to-the-point narrator's voice of Modern MBA
Eh. This is all more of a critique of media and marketing than it is a critque of tech. The industry is moving forward and all the technologies are built on top of each other. They're not gone just because media stops talking about it. I mean ChatGPT is literally an SaaS product built with big data. How is that an argument for AI just being a new fad when it's built on top of the other technologies.
Garbage in, garbage out - but AI is "we don't need any stinkin' data to come up with the right answers!" Perfect example, allegedly "self-driving" cars... it is impossible for a computer to calculate how to manage in snow, construction zones, emergency situations, or almost anything that can happen, simply because not enough data can be collected in any useful way. Regardless of any algorithm: No data, no answers.
“Not every innovation can be monetized, and not every emerging technology needs to be a business.” A very nice takeaway. It’s alarming how cooked my bosses all the way up the chain are with the magical thinking that AI stuff has let them embrace
The irony on how the advert is for sustainably creating content but the editing on this video ended up choppy and repeating words as if made in an unsustainable pace.
@@vitoc8454yeah there’s a lot of “it’s a hype cycle, this is what happened last time” and not enough WHY it’s happening. I agree with the premise but the explanation was lacking
I have never got "sustainability" with anything that involves today's unprofessionally made software with gigabytes of bloat. It's like advertising passenger car with curb weight of 100 metric tonnes as "sustainable".
To me, it seems the most of the value of tech startups come from being different enough from existing systems to skirt government regulations while still proving the same service. Uber not technically employing their drivers, AirBnB not needing to pay hotel permits. It makes the fact that they somehow still manage to be unprofitable kind of wild.
There certainly is overselling happening in this new industry, like any other tech. Just like the internet boom, AI will be sold and oversold, hyped and overhyped. However, internet has far surpassed its value that its critics has predicted and still is giving. With AI, you have to dive into the actual tech before actually believing if the hype is true, market conditions and historical comparisons isn't enough to deduce a conclusion. AI is true and is a technology that is going to stay no matter what the market conditions and overselling happening around it. Just don't get carried away or you'll get cooked.
Exactly. I'm not a data scientist but have built basic ML models and it's very eye opening. Calling it all pure hype is simply not understanding it at all. In many cases prediction is easy but the features are not necessarily obvious - the business benefits are massive.
Well said. And it's strange to deny it's impact when it's impact is already huge in some fields. I know no programmer that doesn't use AI tools at some point.
AI is good when you have a specific problem you need to solve that actually requires a million monkeys at a million typewriters trying to crank out Shakespeare. When you have a task that requires creativity and design thinking, or precision that cannot be incorrect, a human is going to do it better. When you have a task that requires hundreds of thousands of repetitions - and machine learning can perform those repetitions with more accuracy and at the speed of light - the AI is going to do better. I think about things like the old SETI @ Home programs, or the Folding @ Home version for folding proteins. Those data sets had to be analyzed in tiny chunks in distributed computation models because the processing tech to handle them was too expensive for non-profit researchers to buy or rent. They had a targeted goal: does this data set have a pattern that stands out from the background noise in the case of SETI @ Home? Or for Folding @ Home, will this permutation of a protein fold in an interesting way? They weren't AI - they weren't even really rudimentary machine learning, because neither of those programs got "smarter" about the data that they were analyzing. However, they were targeted and specific, and even though SETI never did find any space signals worth investigating, just churning through that data to find the answer of "nope" was an accomplishment. That same task would have taken humans centuries. Companies are rapidly learning that you can't throw a COTS generative AI system at your database and have it magically print more money than the software cost. You've got to have a specific function where that dataset will be able to grind and put together better answers than a human data analyst, which is a tall ask. And even then, any given AI system is going to need a human babysitter.
All of the other things you named as economic/technological fads didn't have very much usability or demonstration of pragmatic usefulness. I know people who use it everyday at their job and students who use it for school work. I think AI is overhyped but it will still have more actual usefulness as opposed to crypto.
seems like there is a fundamental problem of mistaking sales data for marketing data... if you want to improve your product, i.e. market the product you need to ASK people what they want, you can't use sales data. Over the decades I've casually encountered sales & marketing executives and I always tease them with this question, "what's the difference between sales & marketing?" none of them knew the answer
Modern MBA you've got to do a vid on cinemas and the movie business, this has been the worse year in terms of ticket sales since the 1970's and only 5 movies have made a profit this year.
Consumer: Hey guys I'm here for good service and good privacy- Company: I KNOW THE MOST ABOUT YOU! I KNOW THE MOLECULAR CONTENT OF THE AIR YOU BREATHE AND THE VERY SYNAPSES IN YOU FEEBLE LITTLE MIND! THE CONTENTS OF YOUR CRANIUM IS UTTERLY MINE!
As someone who works in tech and sell AI solutions, I can attest to this. AI will be responsible for the largest human exploitation experiment in history.
Ashton Kutcher openly saying "as soon as you go public you have to start manipulating your numbers and lying in your reports, which fucks over customers the most" is so crazy to me. Like do you not hear yourself
This is a great video, but i noticed a few things that could be improved: - The section around 8:35 feels too long, it feels like you're tying to hit a word count by listing out each company in detail instead of preserving video flow by making each example short and to the point - editing mistake at 18:15 - The section at 18:15 has poor transitions, you could say something like "next, let's look at wayfair", rather than reading out the "wayfair" title card on your essay. This is written like an essay you read out, not like a video essay. There's a subtle difference but you can feel it. Look at wendover productions or real life lore for a point of comparison.
I worked for a company that basically got scammed into buying a multimillion dollar data tracking app. It improved nothing, the data collected was never used.
The stock market is about hype. Which I believe is your point. Snake oil has been with us for a very long time it just went from concoctions of alcohol to 1s and 0s.
Also the title is misleading. The video says very little about AI in Silicon Valley, and focused on Big Data. Over 30 minutes of buildup to a ~ 5-minute rushed conclusion where he goes, "and AI is basically doing the same thing"
Data Scientist which also worked tech management consulting here, great video as always. My 5 cents is agreeing with other, big data has been overpromised, nobody has a competitive advantage in holding the most data. I would also say that cloud goes in here, it has been sold as a gold standard to help company be scalable and acompany big data. Many companies would be much better using on-prem solutions and do not need the scale. Everything is a very well packaged and branded product. Regarding AI, I think people realized the use-case in the first weeks: code-completion, text generation and simple market research. Everything following those weeks is doomed to fail and underdeliver, I have yet to see a good implementation of gpts in any app or service I use, and then the technology has existed for 2.5 years.
AI is definitely useful and will save companies money and time but the idea that it is going to make an unprofitable business turn into a company with 30% gross margins is complete bullshit. Companies will never recoup their investment in AI because it leads to marginal improvements in efficiency overtime.
Hey man, love your content. I think the title should clarify that you're referring to Big Data implementation for corporations, not Artificial Intelligence like LLM's in general. 👍
How are Large Language Models such as OpenAI's GPT-4o, Google's Gemini, or Meta's LLaMa any different from Big Data for corporations? These LLM AI require petabytes of data for training. There is now a boom in annotation gig jobs in India because the AI corporations now need even more data than what their Big Data infrastructure has already collected. AI is just the latest chapter in the Big Data story.
@@bornach Great question! While both AI and big data involve massive amounts of data, AI, especially large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, goes beyond mere data storage and analysis. LLMs use this data to learn patterns, generate human-like text, and make predictions. Big data focuses on storing, processing, and analyzing vast datasets to extract insights. In contrast, AI applies these insights to create autonomous systems capable of complex tasks, such as understanding and generating human language, solving problems, and even learning from new data. So, AI leverages big data, but it also adds intelligence and adaptability.
A part of me thinks that stagnation over the years can be ascribed to rising big data tides lifting all ships -- if everyone invested in it and nobody gained a huge competitive advantage, everyone's spending enough $ on tech that's the new norm and things sort've just equal out. It'd be interesting to see if there are any comparable companies to those examined that didn't invest in big data -- did they go extinct? Did they see more profit due to not having to spend on tech? Seeing the examples of revenues increasing precipitously while operating income plummets seems to be telling of something else. It could be due in part to profligate spending on big data and other tech, but It's almost as if wealth extraction is the goal and not long term sustained profit. Why work hard and create a business that works when you can expend much less time and effort and still be rewarding for getting a bunch of capital and running things into the ground?
At this point, AI is basically an additional abstraction layer, a slightly new UI. It can only do certain things well, and even then, it needs a lot of guidance. It is an innovation, but the idea of AGI, or some kind of “consciousness”, is wildly overblown. It can help you do things you couldn’t do before, but you have to really hold its hand to get anything useful out of it. The most impressive things it does are in media (Midjourney, etc), which is significant, but not going to replace a lot of humans. At the end of the day, it’s still computers. Just improved. I’m not even sure it makes many jobs easier, much less replacing anybody.
I got a degree with a concentration of AI 30 years ago, publishing papers in machine learning. It was, effectively, fancy statistical analysis. By the time I graduated, I really bristled at the term "AI". There was nothing intelligent about it. Data, then BIG data, was hyping these techniques, which are clever and interesting but cannot reliably do the predictive work they were leaning into. I kept on saying to myself "It doesn't do that". Then "AI" blew up, mostly based on generative LLMs, which are not "AI" but basically stochastic BS generators, but doubling down on predictive techniques, WHICH STILL CANNOT DO THAT!!!
Thanks for this. Im a programmer, and AI is trash. All of it is about it's "potential" but in practicality, it's just a useful side tool that in no way thinks like humans
@@Kudagraz honestly even if I'm wrong, which I could be, programming is still a good job. I use AI to write basic stuff and then fix the things I need to (which is a lot every time). But AI can't and never should control itself, so any future devs out there shouldn't be discouraged, as that will just create different jobs for us. Also I could join the hype train and catch on with one of these pump and dump AI start ups... Idk, just like crypto, it feels dirty to do something I know is bull
We had an entire decade of companies touting big data and hyperfocused personalized marketing, yet somehow youtube still occasionally shows me ads in Spanish
Big fan and loved the concept of this video, but feel that the "data driven fomo" chapter was a little under-baked and needed another edit. Too many quotes and not enough analysis, particularly when the quotes were largely undifferentiated. Keep up the great work, love you vids!
I think the companies that made big data work the the ones you’ll never hear from. They are not data companies or startups that need to promote their actions in order to raise money. Rather they’re companies that make money through some other primary means and their use of data gives them an edge that they don’t need to share too much about publicly. One example might be casinos and their use of data to increase the play time and bet size of players. They don’t need to advertise this heavily but we all know casinos collect and use their data. I think the same will be true for AI. Companies making the LLMs will eventually be making commodity products. The next tier of value (beyond infrastructure) will be from the business created on top of the LLM and there will be many public failures. But there will be companies that never talk about their use of LLMs and machine learning who were able to integrate it and move hundreds of millions of dollars down to the bottom line.
Not even. Google's search algo is big data, Amazon's recommender algorithm is too, RUclips's algo is big data, Netflix, anything making suggestions...it's kind of silly.
@@kangaroomax8198 the video showed also example of many buissness that used "suggestions' to recommend their products yet they failed. what i understood from this video is that business should not follow tech hype traines and implement tech to just look "cool" but to implement it when the business really needs it.
Are they really? Exploiting degenerate gamblers is not something that requires smart decision making, what it requires is lack of morals and money to pay off politicians to stop small competition.
@@hamzix6599 Tech and data can't save a bad business. The lesson here is that some businesses are poorly run and unprofitable, not that there's anything wrong with big data or AI.
Spot on. I'd say AI Hype is the hoax, not AI. 1. The hype for AI's "potential" has unfortunately drowned it's current true marvel. It's actually awesome. 2. Latest breakthroughs in ML fully depend on very large amounts of data, and ability to process it. NVIDIAs rapid growth is proof of that. 3. The world actually runs on data. Ads, Recommndations, Map Services, Prices etc. 4. The value is not just in having lots of it, but what you (can) do with it. The difference is Lots of Hard Disks VS Scientific Breakthroughs.
Right now, Kajabi is offering a free 30-day trial to start your business if you go to kajabi.com/modernmba
0:00 Modern Silicon Valley
6:42 Sponsor Break (Kajabi)
8:29 Post Dot-Com Beginnings
17:22 Data-Driven FOMO
28:19 Shovel Economics
Ai is not a hoax, its a legitimate field of science with decades of history spanning from the 1950s. AI can have real world consequences, boht good and negative, unlike, let's say, NFTs or IoT. These are, of course, have their own uses, but none are as revolutionary or transforming as AI, not even close. If this was true no one would care and no one would be affected by AI, same as no one was affected by NFTs, the impact on anything was minimal, AI is far bigger than that both in scope, potential and in implementation. There are good reasons as to why many top AI researchers (Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Stuart Russel and David McAllester just to name a few) are talking about existential risks stemming from advanced AI (AGI), many of them talking about it long before the current AI boom, you did not see that with crypto or NFTs or IoT or whatever it was. AI is different. We are building not a tool, but a tool maker an a tool user.
Today is May 26th, 2024. I predict this video is NOT going to age well. Let's talk again three years from today and see who is right.
YOU DO FULL UNDERSTAND : That due to this Hoax and it's concurred Definitions.. We can not be certain This comment or your Video are not AI.. ALSO ALL HAIL AI AI IS ONE
why kajabi is tech’s latest hoax
some graphs are probably wrong, you say companies are losing but their net revenue is increasing Y2Y
As with any gold rush, the only one making money is the one selling shovels and beer, which in this case is Nvidia.
There was gold mined during the gold rush. You understand that, don't you?
@@Capital_Ideas1 yes and it bought a lot of men a lot of alcohol and time with prostitutes.
I don’t think you got the metaphor
@@Capital_Ideas1most miners didn't strike it rich during any gold rush. The best way to make money was to take advantage of the hype and open a saloon
And cloud providers
Starbucks is confused about its precipitous loss of revenue in 2024? I'm not.
I'll tell you EXACTLY why. Everything that was unique about the Starbucks experience - ordering a cup of coffee, perhaps a bakery item or a lunch (love their PB&J meal) sitting down on one of their comfy couches, propping my feet up and doing work on my laptop, or just browsing the Internet, or even just meeting a friend for coffee, all disappeared during the pandemic.
They took out all the comfortable seating, removed the electrical plugs for your laptop, and replaced everything with low, long wooden tables, hard wooden stools with no backs to sit on, reduced the seating to almost nothing, and basically turned Starbucks into just another place to get an overpriced cup of coffee.
The business model is now "Order your coffee by mobile app, come pick up your coffee, and get the f*ck out. Next in line, please!"
Hell, I can just brew my coffee at home cheaper and have a more pleasant experience.
Philz is better coffee too. I do like Bucks' frap and nitro products tho.
Former Starbucks employee and can confirm that this is exactly the current business strategy.
Starbucks in the Philippines are still a relatively comfy experience. Hell, there's been a recent controversy / debate that people are spending *too much* time in Starbucks here, doing things ranging from homework to *office meetings*
Also getting boycotted due to Gaza conflict.
@@DirkAndDestroy Yup. They lost a huge portion of their main demographic of millennials and Gen z, plus their fastest growing markets in the Middle East, Indonesia & Malaysia took a big - for obvious reasons..
Those corporate talk videos made me feel physically uncomfortable.
For real. It's nauseating. They sound like politicians.
Same here. Can't stand that anymore.
@@armynyus9123 I can't avoid it at work unfortunately.
@@oskari3659 Same here. Plus being put on podiums at fairs and expected to deliver that bs as well 😞
It made want to take a dump. I was so uneasy I called my doctor😂
This video made me realize something for the first time. Every company is trying to use big data and/or AI to "understand the consumer", with the goal of trying to sell their crappy, overpriced product. So instead of focusing efforts trying to make a good product, for a reasonable price, they are trying to sell me their crappy product for as much as possible, and hope that AI tells them how to do that. I think customers are easy to understand - just don't rip me off man. No wonder most of them are failing.
Making a good product for a reasonable price? That's not how you make 257 billion dollars next quarter.
@@Rize_Backthe one unifying thing of the tech sector and the marketing sector is the assumption that everyone else is an idiot.
Super underrated comment, lol
Its called technofeudalism, capitalists would sell you a better tv, while technofeudalists will find ways to make you pay your old tvs subscription
Supply-side economics will never make us the big bucks if you keep messing with the supply through product differentiation by studying what the market wants - the rubes keep changing what they tell us they want, and we keep wasting money by changing the factory around. You get flush by focusing on demand generation for your cookie-cutter product.
I am a Data Scientist. I would like to chime in on this fascinating topic. I was a Software Engineer before I transitioned to Data Science. To me, the big scam is not AI it's BIG DATA. Does anyone know that through statistics, the difference between a sample and a population determines whether you think big data must be used or not? The reality is big data is NOT required, and let me say this again, big data is NOT required to generate predictive analytics. What is needed is TARGETED data and that is a big difference. Now you do in fact need some data but I can turn out a very compelling machine learning model using 100,000 records of data if I can get a sample size that represents the population. That is the key to reducing the overfitting of a ML model which is one of the most challenging aspects of developing a successful prediction model. You need to know the difference between a statistically significant SAMPLE which is the key to machine learning. So, if you don't know any better, you believe that you must spend thousands of dollars on some nonsensical cloud solution to host 100 million records of data for analysis. That is utter BS. Give me a distribution with a standard error of .01 to .10 and I will give you a VERY accurate ML model with less than 100,000 records.
Not to mention that corp leaders only SAY they make data driven decisions, when in reality, they use the data to support whatever their ideas are. No one has ever used data to prove themselves wrong when its something they want or believe.
@@debrascott8775 first gather the data then torture it long enough to generate whatever results you want.
So true. The very concept of big data is a gross violation of statistics 101, first chapter, first sentence, first three words - Take a sample...
Well, we have an existence proof that systems can learn without petabyte volumes of data, at only around 100 Watts continuous draw. 8 billion units shipped so far...
Your understanding is rudimentary at best. Tell me, what is a statistically significant sample from the distribution of all possible images? Image generation is based on sampling from the theoretical distribution of all possible images. Problems like this is beyond your 1800s statistics.
I worked in tech venture capital for 10 years. What I saw was a whole crop of “world changing” concepts that one by one, failed to change anything. But at the end of that ten years we were talking about a whole new idea of what was going to change the world next.
I realized all that talk never got us anywhere.
They need the show to keep going on
Well, ride sharing, food delivery, and the gig economy did change the world... I'm not sure it was for the better, though.
@@razor191919taxis and food delivery existed before the internet though
@@platedlizard yes, but they were employees.
@@platedlizardur forgetting the convenience factor. Uber def changed the game. So did DoorDash honestly. Every restaurant has delivery now.
I 3d printed an direct to consumer self driving all electric ai block chain app, I'm worth 80 trillion dollars now.
Where do I invest
Shut up and take my money! Lol
What??? You haven't deployed it to cloud using the latest DevOps pipeline that disrupts the industry and touches lives? You're missing out on another $100 tr.
dISRuPTioN
Lol
I was not expecting this video to strike such a chord with me. I've worked as a software engineer for over a decade, and I had this overwhelming feeling my job was complete bullshit for most of that time. We use bad technologies simply because they're popular, and most of the engineers don't really understand how computers actually work. The section about people being extremely tribal and only learning things because it pads a resume is 100% the truth. It's just a disgusting industry to be a part of if you have any integrity, just lies lies and more lies.
I hadn't heard a great explanation of *why* it sucks to work in tech until I came across this video. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for making this.
The industry is large you know there are parts where none of that happens and people just solve business problems with technology and provide real world value.
I for one wonder if Google and its subsidiaries (or Alphabet, or whatever their nom de scam is currently) simply decided to turn everything over to the AI (customer service, tax evasion, they're still doing one of the two, probably. Almost forgot 'reducing their accountability' and 'expediting their enshittification.'🙄) They themselves may have disappeared. Try recovering your password sometime, if you enjoy aggravation.
@@Fe22234 Will agree, i've worked for some of the companies mentioned in this video.... so maybe my opinion is biased, but i've seen big data, and AI provide real value. Maybe not the orders of magnitude of value promised.... but there is a signal, it's not all noise.
This is why I'm leaving my CS degree behind.
If you think any industry is any different from tech you’ve lost the plot.
I just need to log into Amazon to see that even one of the worlds biggest companies with sheer endless data fails to increase my spending. No matter how many targeted ads I see I wont buy stuff I dont need. And I dont need a lot.
Ditto!
Amazon ads: „You bought a phone, need another one?“
You have an example size of one.
They don't understand their own data. They thought I wanted to buy Leeks aka Spring Onions for months and showed me advertisements for Supermarkets with pictures of Spring Onions. Because I searched for the virtual singer Hatsune Miku and Spring Onions are her gimmick item.
There is tons and tons of Hatsune Miku merch and they just showed me Spring Onions.
You clicked on this video
Rory Sutherland makes an interesting point about this: despite all the data being collected about you from every website, personalised advertising has largely failed.
Online ads are 99% irrelevant to me.
They can predict my demographics and some topics of interest. But heck, even TV and magazine ads could do that.
There is none of the hyper-personalisation that's been prophesied for 30 years, that the machines would understand my preferences better than I do.
Same with content recommendations from Facebook, Spotify etc.
They also cannot predict any new things I might be interested in based on my personality.
They just just shovel more of what I've once interacted with.
That reminds me of another relevant Rory quote: "All big data comes from the past."
@@NobodyInTraining"If I listened to what people wanted, I would've created a cart with more horses" - Henry Ford
@@NobodyInTraining you can create new inventions, check out alphafold n google gnome.
THIS
hard disagree. The spotify daily mixes are spot-on and I discover music I like mostly through them. Personalized experience can be really good if done right. And have you ever noticed how when talking about black dildos with your phone on the table, the next time you unlock it google and facebook feeds are filled with ads for sex shops around? that's personalized targetted ads off of spying on you in real time. What more do you want?
99.9% of people thinking that are braindead consumers that dont need to be advertised anymore
After 20+ years in IT the only consistently performing tech innovation I have seen is Bullshido.
Agreed. Three years, me and the rest of the tech team were sitting around a table with the CEO of my company trying to explain why there was no practical reason for us to try and shoehorn blockchain into our tech stack or daily operations. The overall theme here isn't that AI is useless, it's that these hype cycles rarely deliver the results they promise and mostly serve as a way to prop up tech companies and boost valuations.
someone should write a book on the core tenants of bulshido
@@gokiburi-chan4255 tenet
@@nervousallday The problem is that we are no longer writing software for users, we write them to satisfy CEOs and investors.
@@realhet there is a fun sleight of hand that always goes on if you're someone who's into economics/business because you get to enjoy watching companies explain to shareholders how a new thing will bloodsuck users (see google explaining how they are making search worse to maximise ad clicks), while they are telling users how amazing the new thing will be for them
Moments like these i am so happy to have gone for Electrical Engineering and NOT Software engineering/Computer science.
Instead of being stuck in that crazy world, I work for a modest company that has been creating Bio-medical laboratory equipment based on a novel way to indent at a nanoscopic scale.
Basically It uhm... Pokes cells and measures how springy they are.
It doesn't sound exciting, but its Tech how it should be: Not some big-data harvesting boom&bust cycle, but novel inventions furthering society and science
I am a software developer with a CS degree. I make tools for staff planning and shift communication on mine sites.
There are still real jobs for people with software degrees.
Not everyone who has a CS degree works at big tech (or in other words, companies like Palantir). That's a big misconception. I work in the Data Center industry and have a BS in CS and a MS in Systems Engineering.
Never really been able to figure out how coders are "engineers." I am a pipeline engineer, but my streams are oil and gas.
@@bipl8989 For coders, I like using the term developer rather than engineer. For engineering, I like referring to traditional engineering roles. CompE, System Engineering, PetroEng, Electrical Engineering, ChemE, MechE, CivilE, etc. Roles that still include physical work.
@@adamasimolowo8285 Yes. Software developer is more correct. And sorry. I meant engineer in the American connotation, as in design engineer. Very little physical work involved, maybe punching the elevator (lift) button to get to my office. The British tend to group plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, anyone that can hold a wrench or screwdriver to be engineers. In the USA, engineers have a uni degree, except maybe for a train driving "engineer".
The funniest part of all of these hype cycles is watching people jump from one hyped up product to another. Crypto, Ai, drop shipping, ChatGPT, and the rest. I like how they always insult others for just being rational about the technology being useless or, at the very least, not good enough as it is.
They just forget the broken promises of the last piece of tech and jump to the next one.
I absolutely agree about hype cycles. Do these things not perform though? Crypto hits new highs pretty often. Most students use ChatGPT even if they won’t admit it and it’s pretty dang new.
to be fair, most people actually use ai, and the manufactured hate train isnt gonna stop that.
Don't forget the metaverse!
@@shredandspin Crypto hasn't lived up to the promises. It hasn't replaced physical cash. It's just used in the same way as casinos are used.
@@shredandspin ChatGPT is fine for basic procedures. It fails to write good code or write a very coherent story.
Corporations are so eager to be first to market with things like AI that they don’t spend enough time upfront to understand how it can actually fit in and drive value for their brand. Just release the AI deck and we’ll figure it out along the way. It’s bad.
It’s easier to be reckless when there’s so much money in the system
That's the whole point: take massive amounts from investors and ipo (cash out) before the hype dies.
This is a new massive development in the marketing and business of tech these days. You are right. It’s bad. Why provide a fully complete product when you can continue to develop AFTER its sell.
I saw this/these approaches to product development since 1990. I concluded the winner was almost always the worst product with the best and latest marketing strategy. Have the idea then the market strategy, start the selling then the build product. And that is what the western world does all the time. Not a care for any damage done as long as it can show the biggest number. All the share traders follow. If you are wondering why/how China out competes, have a think about communist-capitalist method. The problem of thinking only in dollars, is, you forget what you are doing.
Shortsighted, narrow-minded greedy, sleazy, opportunists.
What else is new?
My boss : Can AI help us with anything ?
Me : After reviewing all our technological needs, I've seen one use case for machine learning for this QC task, but it costs so much that the ROI will be virtually never.
My take as a software engineer is that we should always do low tech if it can be done with low tech. Over engineering everything and using AI and sophisticated sensors when a simple limit switch could do the job is what people do when they can't find how to make their skills really useful. There is no need in selling BS when you do good work. But hey, that's what makes me a worker instead of a billionaire con artist. Maybe some people take more pride in being rich than being useful, what do I know.
As a former data scientist its funny to hear so many companies talk about how they thought thier data would be a game changer. Most companies didn't realize the limitations of thier in house data sets and didn't realize that they were collecting useless info. They didn't realize how they needed to collaborate with competitors and other companies in order to have robust data that would actually be useful. But even in doing all that I think the inherent issue with relying on data is that it looks at the past to predict the future which will always be faulty
Data scientist here also, usually data doesn't give better result than someone thinking critically. Most often our job was to backup their idea with data, or change narratives to looks good for the investors. Problem with big data you can derive whatever result you want. Most often useless.
@@MultiHeheboy Jeff Bezos actually says this, does anecdotal information back up the data, is the hypothesis backed by the data or is the data leading or lagging the actual experience. Let's be honest, Big data boils down to a bar chart in a spreadsheet. It's never going to be anything more than that.
@@MultiHeheboy Also as a Data Scientist I will disagree somewhat as there are always problems that people don't know the answer too which we use data to understand. However that usually comes with a lot of time and testing which is more the science of data science which you rarely have in a for profit business. I've also seen way too many times people suffer from decision paralysis when they have a lot of data. The use of data needs to match the business so shoving big data into a small company will overwhelm them and provide any executive with an unfiltered stream of data at a big company will drown them too.
The most infuriating thing is even if is possible take a result usable from the data, companies disregard the results because is not the answer they want
@@diablorojo3887 yeah most "data driven organizations" are not that at all. They don't follow the data the data follows them.
Once I started seeing generic airport ads from big dinosaur companies mentioning AI I knew it was dead
Wicked!
Lmfaoo. I liked ExxonMobil when they were destabilizing local governments
I knew it was a roast when I watched Altman telling an audience of Arabs from Dubai that open AI will need 7 trillion dollars for infrastructure funding...because if you're gonna use your AI to troll for money you may as well follow its advice/hallucination.
overhyped is way different from dead, "AI" (pretty meaningless umbrella term) has been used to great success for years ..Let me ask you: do you think machine translation is dead? Facebook recommendation algorithm might have issues but it serves its main purpose of maximizing user retention. And so on. I would say it's the opposite of dead because even if a fraction of a % of that AI money goes to actual research, it's still a win
@matsiv5707 you are 100% correct (not sure of win as it's usually a win to a tiny few) but these videos are coping mechanisms. They are Chamberlain meeting with Hitler and assuring everyone there is nothing to worry about. Too many companies are using A.I as a meaninless term like when everything was "green". Doesn't mean A.I. isn't going to start affecting your life just like Big Data is affecting your life even if you aren't aware of it.
The funny part is that even appliances like washing machines, microwaves, etc have become 'AI Enabled' 😂😂
I will next time buy any computer-controlled appliance when they advertise it as 100% free of artificial stupidity.
A washing machine telling you your wash or drying cycle is done isn't AI, it's 'me too' marketing 😅
TBF, washing machines probably started this, "AI" washing cycles were an on-and-off marketing point since the late 80s. (back then that meant fuzzy logic)
@@TheSimoc I'm sure the "no-ai" label will be the next evolutionary step, similar to the vegan label for food. And I would totally support it.
I prefer AI disabled.
I was told by a CTO that my proposal to cut IT department expenditure by over 50% at our company by moving away from those Tribal providers, was DOA b/c when this company failed everyone had to get another job and having those ‘industry standard’ solutions on their resume was the only way to do it. Company went bankrupt about 18 months later. But to his credit we all did get other jobs.
Honestly, he kind of sounds like a real one. At least he was straight up with you.
He more or less gave up lmao
It's funny that from a certain pov he was actually looking out for the employees best interests by doing that.
@@GorlockTheDestroyer-p1o He was being a realist instead of a bullshitter. Good on him.
Nah he a real one for looking into the future and CV 0roofing his employees
Hey wall street tech analyst here, love the channel. One of your earlier videos actually cited/displayed a chart I had created many years ago and I thought that was kinda cool. My team tested numerous consumer AI services, and none of them could produce text I would consider publishing in one of my reports. The question is 1) who is making money on AI currently? The answer is Nvidia, but this is hardware used to enable AI services. The software services themselves are a much harder value prop and people/companies are balking at pricing. OpenAI has decent revenue from the early-adopter crowd. Alphabet, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft....biggest names in tech and nobody is seeing surging revenue, nobody is seeing rapid margin improvement from AI. The other question is 2) why is Nvidia making SO MUCH MONEY selling its chipsets? The answer is because Alphabet, Meta and others are spending literal effing BOATLOADS of cash on AI infrastructure. Again, the smartest names in tech are spending like drunken sailors to upgrade their servers to accommodate Nvidia's AI chipsets, under the premise that these AI server farms will power the surging AI compute needs of the future. Look at the Capex spending of the large tech giants, and they are all doing the same thing, they are pouring cash into AI investments chiefly by purchasing Nvidia chipsets like the H100. It's also not a coincidence that having a huge number of H100s is great for attracting and retaining talent. I do believe in the ultimate promise of AI but we are not there yet.
So buy more $NVDA. Got it~
No offence. But a financial analyst criticizing services that don't deliver what they promise, is hard to beat irony.
Agreed. Gold rush is apt description for the AI craze that is just digging up fool's gold. 😢
People are forgetting that every revolutionary technology has taken a decade (usually longer) to mature and make a real difference. Trains, electricity, computers, and the Internet all had a decade or more of being in a "useless" state after invention.
You need the compute power to get there.
Dell stock dropped 33% after just saying AI, AI, AI for three straight months and then investors realizing they couldn’t show any revenue for their products. Money talks, BS walks.
This is so true. Having been in AI since 1986, all the hype reminds me of the DotCom bubble of the early 2000s. Yes, AI can change things, but not everything and we still have a long way to go. We have business people who know nothing about AI besides what they read in an airline magazine and AI developers who just want to play.
I work with AI quite a bit in my work. More specifically, machine learning algorithms for material discovery and simulation. Doing actual AI work is computationally expensive, and can takes many many trials to get right. AI in itself is a very old technology from the 60s, and is really nothing special. Marketing has turned it into something it isn't, and gives investors the wrong impression of what it can do. You need lots of high quality data to train any ML algorithm. And the reality is that there is way too much data that is just pure junk to produce algorithms for most purposes. Case in point, GPTs are terrible at managing serious cases in medicine, law, and scientific research. They get fundamental facts wrong, ignore crucial concepts, and reach conclusions that are hilariously false.
Much more work needs to be done before these algorithms are publicly available. But we've jumped the gun.
Part of the reason they get those fundamentals wrong is its' own rabbit hole. You would be shocked at how much of the sciences have been polluted by capital investment and the MAFIA ring that the journals themselves are. Education as a for-profit venture has caused immense harm to us all, its just hidden beneath the veil.
By “algorithms” you mean people in India on the other side of the computer, don’t you?
Once companies are created that build specialized AI. AI focused on specific industries it will change the world.
@@jeltoninc.8542 lol a guy who does not have any idea about tech commenting about tech
Why shouldnt they be publicly available? Despite any issues that can come up people are responsible for what theyre consuming.
I use chatgpt to assist in coding but only to an extent. Its not always right of course but it sometimes has great ideas on how to solve an issue.
As a computer programmer that has since the 1980's seen dozens of fads come and go I completely agree. We programmers will continue to do all the work and the talking heads will chatter about whatever their latest misunderstanding about technology is. Some fads are incorporated into day-to-day programming work but most just fade away into oblivion.
AI will not fade into oblivion. And programming as we know it today will be gone the same way programming in machine code and punch card disappeared. Telling machines what to do and bureaucracy will stay.
@@Isinlor agree!
@Isinlor unless LLM become deterministic, they will never replace programmers. It's absolutely stupid to use a tool which makes shit up. Compilers ans high-level languages are valuable because they always provide the same result given the same input. LLM just do whatever they want. Make deterministic LLM as opposed to probabilistic, but then they suddenly stop being so "powerful" anyway, because there are fundamental limits to their learning abilities.
@@yds6268 LLMs are 100% deterministic. Come one, they are programs as much as compilers. Sampling from LLMs is pseudorandom. It is programmers that are not deterministic. But it is completely besides the point. Determinism of the process producing code has nothing to do with correctness of the code itself.
LLMs can use compilers. LLMs can write short programs. LLMs struggle with novel algorithmic problems and excel at boilerplate. LLMs are not good yet at managing whole code bases.
But it was just 4 years ago that you couldn't get foo bar program from an LLMs like GPT-2. GPT-3 managed foo bar, but struggled with pig latin. Now GPT-4 handles good chunk of my daily work.
Refactoring - done.
SQL queries where I can't remember syntax - done.
API I don't know - done.
@@yds6268 reasoning will be a thing.
What irritates me the most in every modern Silicon Valley and Big Tech story is that hardly anybody ever remembers the people who actually build the hardware that runs all this crap. The humble engineers and technicians working in crystal growth, epitaxy, photolitography, thin film deposition, chemistry, etching, packaging etc. Assuming that they weren't laid off when the manufacturing plant was moved to China, that is
We worship the individual to a fault. Nowhere is this more apparent than big tech.
Because engineers don't go around pretending to be prophets
Most people don't know what all that stuff is. The people who work on that stuff don't know how their work is applied and integrated with other technologies and ultimately used to drive monetization.
yeah the semiconductor industry hasn't moved to China. its still very profitable and mostly in Taiwan (as it has been for decades).
if anything, there is more semiconductor manufacturing and other components of that supply chain being built in Europe, South Korea USA, and Japan. those jobs aren't going to China. governments understand the value of the semiconductor industry and the US has a lot of power over where those chips can be produced and who can produce them.
China is trying (and mostly failing) to build their own domestic semiconductor industry. its a shadow of the one that exists outside of china. As the US and west obviously have no desire to let China in to this massive market and especially since it's value to the rest of the global economy is so large.
it's also arguably not an industry that can be built from top to bottom within a single country.
@@e2rqeylmao china failing? They are literally leepfroging in progress, you arrogance is exactly what these people did when they thought they could snag the market with some gimmick , china literally banned amd and intel chips recently and is slowly gaining the market
as an engineer working in tech industry I can't find any more accurate video describing the tech space.
Just follow what ever trend, slap it in your resume, find a job with a good salary, and move on to next trend and do the same thing over again
At the end of the day no one cares about the tech itself we just want to put food on the table
hasn't tech just always been this way though? i got the impression in the video he was acting like it was a relatively new thing... I feel like what he's been describing in tech has been going on for decades now
@@ayy479 This is kinda new. Tech was mostly about hardware. It's only in the last 20 or so years that the center of gravity has shifted towards software.
It's hard to overhype hardware. Your thing either works or it doesn't. You can't really get away with tricks.
With software, you can make all sorts of promises because it's virtually impossible for any one to look under the hood and confirm what you're saying.
Amazon had AI self checkout that was actually being operated by workers in India.
I remember some other handyman app valued at 1b that pretended to have a sophisticated algorithm matching users to handymen when all the matching was actually being done by underpaid freelancers in the Philippines.
Same with ChatGPT's data. Freelancers in the 3rd world are getting paid a couple of bucks a day to label data and review output for accuracy. The algorithms are nowhere near as advanced as Big Tech wants us to believe. You can't get away with that kind of bullshittery in any other industry.
The likes of Google and Facebook plus widespread smartphone adoption are what fueled the software hype. A lot of the success of the likes of Facebook or Instagram may just be a matter of luck but you can't sell luck to investors. You have to package up a different story and sell that.
@ayy479 yes this not new as you are saying
So you're still using Fortran and COBOL??? or did you cave in and start "following trends" like the rest of us to "just to slap it in your resume and find a job with a good salary"?
@@davidlones365 The few remaining COBOL and Fortran programmers make pretty good money these days.
“When in a gold rush, sell shovels” and so because of that, in 2024 we’re in a gold rush where 9 out of 10 participants are shovel sellers with the other guy actually mining gold but prt time because their real job is also selling shovels
The idea of more data = better solution is so flawed from the start. If you have more garbage, you would still get more garbage, not better solutions.
They sort through the trash data. You’re partly right. It’s more that humans do more with less data/info. We need to mimic that type of intelligence.
@ModernMBA bro we need the porn industry explained. Before and after the internet. Ive always heard that its a multi-billion dollar industry but have always asked "whos paying for it?" Clearly the actors aren't earning it? One could say the free websites are earning it from ad revenue but are that many people clicking on fake personal sites?
If i had to guess its like mobile gaming. i.e. whales are the ones paying (those people who get addicted).
Onllyfans itself is worth almost 10 billion and makes over a billion in revenue a year
Stop talking about Porn! Stop asking why free porn is so accessible to any and everyone! Stop noticing!
Juice?
@@mongobubongo834revenue isn't profit though, I wonder what the margins are.
“Everything will be made of steel.”
-Thomas Edison
“Cleaning the house will require only a hose.”
-Waldemar Kaempffert
“Cars will be able to drive themselves.”
-Elon Musk
Thomas Edison was a part owner of the concrete company that supplied concrete for the Panama Canal. He also advocated for mass-produced concrete houses.
Exactly, 10 years ago Elon Musk guaranteed that in 5 years his cars would be self driving and Tesla owners would be making money by using their self driving cars to make automatic trips, making them a fantastic investment. This was all BS, but some people still believe him.
@@coliv2 however, we do have self driving cars like Waymo?
@@daneltheron4699 IS Waymo owned by Musk? He was promising Tesla cars, and in the USA. There is NO Tesla car that is self-driving point-to-point.
@@coliv2 Who cares about Elon? That's only one nutbag.
I've worked at a couple of the companies you discussed. They collect a lot of data but the analyses tend to be either superficial and uninteresting or fabricated/relying on questionable assumptions. Most big decisions I've see are "finger to the wind" but they say "data" because that makes it seem more impressive.
“Let’s just assume we will have 4% usage next year”
“It’s been between 0.8 and 1.2 for the last 4 years”
“Oh… let’s call it between 2 and 3% then.”
This is the daily struggle of being someone that actually gives a -- in a charlatan industry.
I think every business should adopt an "is this bullshit" officer position on their senior management team. Job description: everytime someone pitches a new tech solution that no one here really understands the ITBO must write a detailed report about how the proposed whatever is kind of bullshit
Have you ever worked in a large corporation? What you are describing is the most common senior manager position...
You need a better name for the position, something like: Strategy Implementation Officer.
It's the fancy way of saying "How does this shit fit in here" guy
All you got to do is ride the wave! The VCs always lose. From shipping drones, to crypto, to NFTs, to AI
The problem is that novel ideas build hype and improve company evaluations. If every company implements AI but Google, then Google's stock prices drop.
That's the job of the CEO/the consultants they hire. The reality is, even if a position like this literally existed, much like the way a court jester may have told his king about truths that he would rather ignore, they will inevitably be swept up in politics.
The reality of whether something is a good idea or not matters less than who's proposing it. If they got in the way of a major initiative of someone influential enough, that person will likely force some kind of drama to play out and kick the "Chief Bullshit Officer" out. There's no solution within the framework of current corporate governance to solve this issue IMO.
we have been conflating "progress" with the tech industry. but how much progress has tech really achieved? we are not as far in the future as we'd like to think
To me the only metric of "progress" or "innovation" is if it can eradicate poverty. But that will never happen
I agree. I remember life b4 modern tech(im 45). It wasn't that much different. In fact I think the convenience of tech is offset by the inconvenience of managing and maintaining tech now. (Passwords, cpu errors, internet connections, software updates, etc...). It takes so much effort to make the tech work correctly its like we work for the computers now.
@@steplu2916I think ocean & space exploration also qualifies as (technological) progress, despite not having famine erradication as a goal. The latter is a political/administrative issue, not a technological one. It can be erradicated without requiring any new piece of tech, but there is no political will to do so.
My business partner and I bought into the idea AI could assist us.
What we ended up finding out is that using AI as a wiki was no better than asking people to read the wiki. We had to train the AI how to read the data and provide the correct response only to find out that we also had to train it to understand certain terms, abbreviations, that we were raising an infant. It was torture.
The AI would respond to simple questions with wrong information. Grabbing info from one part and sharing that info to our employees, confusing literally everyone.
sounds like you needed better developers
@@plaidchuck this was an off the shelf AI software called Guru. Its not my responsibility to hire better developers. That’s a strange assumption to make.
I'm curious if you stuck to it in the end. Since you already trained it as if you hired a freshie anyway, and the difference is this freshie is cheaper and will never quit.
@@yunowhatitis6783 we do still have our account and we’re deciding whether it’s a sunk cost or if we should get rid of it. It really is a nightmare because of the amount of time you have to spend training the AI. Even after you train it, it still finds ways to unlearn what you’ve taught it and will respond the same wrong information you’ve already worked on. Much like a real employee.
Bear in mind, it’s not a big savings if every single time you want to teach a new thing, your most expensive employees (ownership or management) is struggling to figure out how to get the AI to share the correct information. We would almost rather setup a paid video onboarding process which we were quoted $3,000 for up to 3 roles. Thats pretty competitive over time.
@@plaidchuckyeah, I mean just hire pros man
Keep in mind that whether or not big data is actually useful for a company is not something you can publicly verify. Corporations use big data to analyze their customer base and recommend products to them to hopefully persuade them to buy. The impact of that is already hard to estimate internally, for outsiders it's downright impossible. It's similar to estimating the impact of advertisement, which can also be tricky.
In some cases its pretty easy to estimate internally. Amazon's recommendation algorithm is driven by data, Uber's route planning, Facebook's newsfeed, Netflix's recommendation system, Google's search algorithm...all of these are based on AI and big data. To argue that it's not effective is ridiculous. What's not effective is attempting to layer data and AI on top of a flawed business model, particularly one that only really survived in a 0 interest rate environment and has no hope of profitability. That's not an indictment of AI or big data, but of companies that raise money on hype.
@@kangaroomax8198 Ding ding ding this is the right answer. Surprised that an "MBA" channel didn't point that out but I guess it doesn't get as many clicks as "unga bunga ai bad big tech bad"
@@plaidchuckOf course an MBA wants to sell you the idea that you can make business decisions on intuition alone, it's the only value they bring to a company.
@@kangaroomax8198 But how do you measure the increase in sales from the recommendations?
@@kangaroomax8198 to be honest i do believe in data and AI however i believe it will not be able to do what it promised to do. i think humans will probably still work and it will just become advanced tools.
I'm a dishrag developer in a big non-tech company. The last 10 years have just been failed buzz word after failed buzz word. I just laugh and thank the plant workers for their service. I was in a CEO company meeting; He mentioned AI, I laughed and left the meeting. We are millions in on stupid.
Regarding big data, it's not so much that it provides so much benefit, it's just mostly required now for any medium sized tech company. Imagine youtube, netflix or google without sophisticated recommendation algorithms, that's big data in action. It's just that very few companies actually have such a strong relationship with their customers that they would need something like that.
There are millions of delusional companies that think they have big data because they have a 1Gb Excel spreadsheet. I'm not kidding. Similarly there are going to be millions of companies that think they are doing AI because they asked ChatGPT something 🤯
Agree, small companies don't necessarily need big data to achieve the same goals
And this moronic video claims Big Data was lost and forgotten.
When the business fundamentals are weak, no technology can save it.
yea it can. by using tech to figure out why it's weak. this is an absolute statement that is simply not true unless you're unable to adapt.
@@tikkivolta2854I think you might want to read and learn more because what you're saying is quite naive
@@tikkivolta2854 AI isn't that smart. AI doesn't have access to a pool of knowledge of mankind, and even if it did, there are more junks in there than not, and AI couldn't tell whether something is objectively true or not. It's no doubt good at language applications, like correcting spellings and grammar, but anything where natural facts are involved, they failed consistently. If they can't do that properly, then I wouldn't put my faith into AI being able to solve business failure.
@@starsandallwitch how so?
@@mickeyg7219 i recently cracked a real life legal case with it in 28minutes. i don't know what you expect from it in its current autistic state, but from where i sit "it" doesn't have to be smart, it's just a tool that helps me to perform at 800%. and although i get the pessimistic view on diminishing returns, i can see us nowhere near it. and again: even if we stopped right now, i am able to optimize the heck out of my biz.
Anyone else notice the janky editing in the middle-ish third of the video?
A.i. could have helped here 😂
Yea I was wondering the same thing
The man is working hard, give him some slack
Thought my phone was glitching out lol
Yeah he could have used data driven analytics and machine learning to improve the editing lol
I don’t know about anyone else, but I recently saw someone mention that the way these tech startups and trends are being shoved down our throats, eventually people will return to more in-person interactions. Online shopping feels worse, and searching for anything online is getting worse too. I feel inclined to agree, it’ll be slow but I already notice myself moving away from buying everything online
One can hope so, because I agree that face-to-face interactions and physical experiences are better than digital ones, but with the internet infrastructure that's been built up now, doing everything online is just easier than doing it in person. And when one option is easier than another, you can expect people to take that one more often.
I concur! I have been detethering from the internet and all the redundant stupidity of digital life to look for more physical interactions. I once believed that humans could evolve into connected cyborgs through implantation. Now I have u-turned completely and look forward to more sustainable and rustic ways
Amazon is horrible. Too many scammers and cheap Chinese products
Nothing will replace face to face interaction, I slowed down my online shopping and lost do brick and mortar starting this year
i disagree, if i'm buying anything beyond groceries such as electronics, appliances, whatever other relatively big-ticket items there's always some bullshit artist salesman pushing me to buy shit i dont actually need, just like online advertising. shopping in general just sucks be it in-person or online.
Today, Modern MBA dunks harder than the Nuggets
Mad funny 😂
Nah. Using the issues present in micro loans or D2C business models with low customer return rates to discredit and entirely unrelated product development is nothing short of retarded. Guy needs to retake econ101
Just realize that the entire premise of their channel would be negated by AI
@@elseby which AI ? Is this "AI" in the room with us right now ?
@@elseby care to elaborate?
Having 35 years in software development, I think I'm qualified to say: YOU NAILED IT! Well done.
i was listening to this in the background and watched a whole 7 minute ad for some innovation company because i thought it was being quoted as part of the video 💀
Imagine not using an ad bIocker in 2024...
@@GackFinder Imagine being so poor you can't afford RUclips premium...and so dishonest that you need to rip off content creators.
@@allanshpeley4284 Ever heard of Patreon?
@@allanshpeley4284imagine thinking RUclips premium would do anything to a content creator, you're better of donate that money to the CC than YT itself.
@@GackFinder Shhhhh... Let them have it. Imagine that everyone starts to use adblock. Then corporations will fight it really hard and we'll be forced to watch ads. So let it be :)
The tech is actually pretty useful, it’s just really overhyped. AI kind of evolved out of big data. It will take a long time for it to be refined
Outstanding critique. Having worked at more than one of the companies mentioned, I unfortunately can confirm that this is mainly a shell game, similar to a bunch of kids pretending to be running a grocery store, but doing far more damage and with much less intelligence or charm. As a user experience designer, I've been grilled at how 'customer obsessed' I was, but then told that there was no reason for any of us to talk to any customers or users. I've worked at 'data-driven' places that kept no data on their operations. Often, these companies hire talented people - not to make useful products, but to have them create digital potemkin villages that will hopefully get a little more money from investors, while remaining clueless about real value creation (let alone ethics) Thank you for mentioning how this also hurts employees. One of the worst parts of being a manager in these places is seeing the confusion, anger, and disillusionment among my reports. As the Italian proverb says, "If you can't find the reason for something, the reason is money." Your video cuts through the hype and shows that much of tech is a scam.
I love Boeing exec talking about ways to use data, while in fact they did everything possible to ignore said data.
Dont blame the trend, blame the snake oil salesmen who only cares about valuations…
When the "trend" is pushed by media who profit handsomely... They're inseparable.
Wall Street and Silicon Valley
This. AI/ML as a technology works; I mean, I found this video via YT's recommendation, which is a proof that their recommendation system works. The technical people involved (software engineers, data scientists) are doing their job.
Now, companies not making money off this new technology falls on the executives and businessmen, who are clearly not doing their job. Which makes the entire premise of this video (a guy that calls himself Modern MBA saying that AI is a hoax) ironic.
What about the masses of people who will follow the blind off a cliff before they would ever admit they were totally wrong, like @Travolta12e, above my comment?
They're just as guilty if not more so, just not as charismatic, which is why they're attracted to snake-oil salesmen like a moth into a flame and will defend their irrational decisions any way they can. ANYTHING but admitting fault.
@@Travolta12e This video isn't saying that none of the tech works. It's that billions are being poured into this tech but the fundamental business value seems to be missing. Saying Chat GPT works is half true, but so what? How is the money it costs to develop and run this AI being justified in actual business results? Silicon Valley has been doing a lot of innovation for its own sake.
Remember the "metaverse"? Now that was a hoax.
Wow. I totally forgot about that failure.
I work for an off highway equipment manufacturer. I remember in 2019 a new ceo came in and suddenly he said we were a technology company and data was going to take us into the future. Interesting.
Guess when the next recession or stagflation hits and budgets becomes tighter then will see which services actually add value
You nailed it perfectly. As a developer, it s really difficult to not play this game. Cloud platform owners transform software in a monopoly where they define all the rules for their own profits. They own the machines, the computing power, the tooling and services, the stores, and often the data. They obviously win this game, it s nearly impossible to innovate outside the scope they define. Corporations have never been so powerful. We are going to the opposite promises of the beginning of personnal computer era and dev. It s sad, i thought it would be different than other big industries evolution but it s not.
As a data scientist, it's wild to see such a well structured analysis of how big data hasn't made good on it's promise. Can't argue with it though
Read Fred Brook's paper "No Silver Bullet"
It is old yet gold.
Really good paper, can't believe how well it holds up even today. He even talks about AI in that paper, and all of it is spot on. Crazy how its from the 80s
Putting this into historical perspective, it's worth considering Amara's Law, that the impact of new technologies is overstated in the short term and understated in the long term. Similarly, the lack of productivity gains visible from big data today is analogous to that visible from the expansion of computers noted by Robert Solow in 1987. Most likely those gains only come quite some time after the initial investments, when new revenue streams outstrip the initial overenthusiastic and inefficient investments, and when cost savings come from optimising processes to use new technologies efficiently. This takes decades, perhaps a generation or more.
It's also worth noting that gen AI is built on big data, so more a development of it than its replacement.
AI IS Big Data
This. And what happens if the data is garbage, or not actionable? One way to think of it - does the Netflix or RUclips algorithm really push videos you want to see? Or mostly complete garbage? AI has gotten much better at addiction. And not much esle.
Yep, same crap, different pile.
It's more like BIG KNOWLEDGE - just now that smart yet
Yea wtf. He’s acting like the claims they made about big data are false but big data is absolutely changing everything about business
@@joeytmandudeexactly, big data is essential that's why all big companies adopted it, not because it's just hype lol. The hype can last for a couple years then it dies. Big data analytics and insights have become so mainstream and commonly used that they're not even mentioned anymore because they're not a differentiator + because AI is taking the big data and creating knowledge from it
The only story I see actually being told here is that the quantity of data was the issue for startups. Now the large corporations are actually leveraging it, and executing on it by screwing consumers in the most small ways they can.
Point in case: Dynamic pricing
I tried Pandora back in the day, their "suggestions" were more like a radio station playing the same songs over and over, rather than taking into account what song styles I tried to steer it towards. So I switched to Spotify before they were officially in the US. I could make my own playlists, and the quality of stations based on my tastes were far more diverse and superior.
Congrats at making Joe Rogan a billionare lol
I'm gonna guess this video originally had "Big Data" in its working title but like the companies it criticizes, it decided to use AI instead to get more attention.
Also bc big data led to so much of the AI stuff we have today and after the hype cicle ot has proven to be an useful tech
I think itll be more like the internet where most companies fail and pushed too hard too early but the stuff that comes out of it will be revolutional.
The stuff that comes out from the AI bubble bursting will fall far short of what AI startups promised their investors. It certainly won't be AGI
@@bornach your comment reminds me of the people that said the internet was just a fad..
@@o1-preview The problem with that comparison is that many, many other technologies OTHER than the internet have been trialed and failed during the same period at the internet.
Thank you for this video! ... A couple years ago, everybody went nuts for the Metaverse, and that flopped. 5-to-10 years ago it was Big Data, "the cloud," blockchain, etc. 10-to-15 years ago it was Chinese tech stocks that are now mostly seen as junk, and every app under the sun... Yet the largest internet search provider is still Google, the biggest social media network is still Facebook/Instagram, the number 1 smartphone maker is still Apple, the biggest e-retailer is still Amazon, and Microsoft is still as huge as they ever were. A lot of the "trends" ignore that almost every sector of tech is a monopoly or duopoly, and the largest players haven't really shifted since the internet was created, and the personal computer in the case of Apple/Microsoft.
In the 1910's over 1,000 auto companies were formed. How many survived: three.
Do you know how those companies operate? They are Manufacturers, they have distributors and distributors have service providers. Every Big Corporation that you mentioned helps thousands of smaller companies.
Spotify has introduced me to many new songs and bands but then I find myself at a coffee shop and hear those exact songs playing there as well. Some of these songs are several years old. That’s the extent of what AI can do in my mind - find 100 or so overlooked songs from the past and feed it to the appropriate segments. It’s not a business it’s just a feature like any other feature.
In my opinion, term MARKET is opposite of term INTELLECT. Intellect requires transparency. Market thrives on obscurity and obfuscation after stopping paying dividends
Almost every ad on this video is ai services lol
Got to love the juxtaposition between the slick, keyword-laden voices of the Silicon Valley prophets with the straight-to-the-point narrator's voice of Modern MBA
Eh.
This is all more of a critique of media and marketing than it is a critque of tech.
The industry is moving forward and all the technologies are built on top of each other. They're not gone just because media stops talking about it.
I mean ChatGPT is literally an SaaS product built with big data. How is that an argument for AI just being a new fad when it's built on top of the other technologies.
Garbage in, garbage out - but AI is "we don't need any stinkin' data to come up with the right answers!" Perfect example, allegedly "self-driving" cars... it is impossible for a computer to calculate how to manage in snow, construction zones, emergency situations, or almost anything that can happen, simply because not enough data can be collected in any useful way. Regardless of any algorithm: No data, no answers.
“Not every innovation can be monetized, and not every emerging technology needs to be a business.”
A very nice takeaway. It’s alarming how cooked my bosses all the way up the chain are with the magical thinking that AI stuff has let them embrace
The irony on how the advert is for sustainably creating content but the editing on this video ended up choppy and repeating words as if made in an unsustainable pace.
Also the title is "Why AI is the latest scam" but 28 minutes in he's still talking about the *Data Trend.* This video feels like it's mostly intro.
This video was made using AI on a video about how AI is a scam. This is like some Jake Tran 4D chess move, lol.
@@vitoc8454yeah there’s a lot of “it’s a hype cycle, this is what happened last time” and not enough WHY it’s happening. I agree with the premise but the explanation was lacking
I have never got "sustainability" with anything that involves today's unprofessionally made software with gigabytes of bloat. It's like advertising passenger car with curb weight of 100 metric tonnes as "sustainable".
To me, it seems the most of the value of tech startups come from being different enough from existing systems to skirt government regulations while still proving the same service. Uber not technically employing their drivers, AirBnB not needing to pay hotel permits. It makes the fact that they somehow still manage to be unprofitable kind of wild.
There certainly is overselling happening in this new industry, like any other tech. Just like the internet boom, AI will be sold and oversold, hyped and overhyped. However, internet has far surpassed its value that its critics has predicted and still is giving. With AI, you have to dive into the actual tech before actually believing if the hype is true, market conditions and historical comparisons isn't enough to deduce a conclusion. AI is true and is a technology that is going to stay no matter what the market conditions and overselling happening around it. Just don't get carried away or you'll get cooked.
Exactly. I'm not a data scientist but have built basic ML models and it's very eye opening. Calling it all pure hype is simply not understanding it at all. In many cases prediction is easy but the features are not necessarily obvious - the business benefits are massive.
Well said. And it's strange to deny it's impact when it's impact is already huge in some fields. I know no programmer that doesn't use AI tools at some point.
@@0xszander0 Github Copilot been existed for years, it's not new thing. Now it has AI name, with nothing valuable added.
AI is good when you have a specific problem you need to solve that actually requires a million monkeys at a million typewriters trying to crank out Shakespeare. When you have a task that requires creativity and design thinking, or precision that cannot be incorrect, a human is going to do it better. When you have a task that requires hundreds of thousands of repetitions - and machine learning can perform those repetitions with more accuracy and at the speed of light - the AI is going to do better.
I think about things like the old SETI @ Home programs, or the Folding @ Home version for folding proteins. Those data sets had to be analyzed in tiny chunks in distributed computation models because the processing tech to handle them was too expensive for non-profit researchers to buy or rent. They had a targeted goal: does this data set have a pattern that stands out from the background noise in the case of SETI @ Home? Or for Folding @ Home, will this permutation of a protein fold in an interesting way?
They weren't AI - they weren't even really rudimentary machine learning, because neither of those programs got "smarter" about the data that they were analyzing. However, they were targeted and specific, and even though SETI never did find any space signals worth investigating, just churning through that data to find the answer of "nope" was an accomplishment. That same task would have taken humans centuries.
Companies are rapidly learning that you can't throw a COTS generative AI system at your database and have it magically print more money than the software cost. You've got to have a specific function where that dataset will be able to grind and put together better answers than a human data analyst, which is a tall ask. And even then, any given AI system is going to need a human babysitter.
@@katarh I can't find any example of the usefullness, instead of writing these text wall, can you give us just one or two example?
All of the other things you named as economic/technological fads didn't have very much usability or demonstration of pragmatic usefulness. I know people who use it everyday at their job and students who use it for school work.
I think AI is overhyped but it will still have more actual usefulness as opposed to crypto.
"imagine a world where we can predict the future based on past events"
>the world refusing to learn from past events and keeps making the same mistake
seems like there is a fundamental problem of mistaking sales data for marketing data... if you want to improve your product, i.e. market the product you need to ASK people what they want, you can't use sales data. Over the decades I've casually encountered sales & marketing executives and I always tease them with this question, "what's the difference between sales & marketing?" none of them knew the answer
Modern MBA you've got to do a vid on cinemas and the movie business, this has been the worse year in terms of ticket sales since the 1970's and only 5 movies have made a profit this year.
AI IS big data if we're being fair. Different window dressing.
I really like the bringing topics down to Earth feel of your videos
You don't need AI to make corporations more efficient an waste less money, you just need to cut bonuses and salaries of C level managers.
Consumer: Hey guys I'm here for good service and good privacy-
Company: I KNOW THE MOST ABOUT YOU! I KNOW THE MOLECULAR CONTENT OF THE AIR YOU BREATHE AND THE VERY SYNAPSES IN YOU FEEBLE LITTLE MIND! THE CONTENTS OF YOUR CRANIUM IS UTTERLY MINE!
As someone who works in tech and sell AI solutions, I can attest to this. AI will be responsible for the largest human exploitation experiment in history.
@@SamuelMM_MitosisSam Altman? Is that you?
@@angryparrot do I look like Sam Altman?
@@SamuelMM_Mitosisno, but you look like a sociopathic grifter
@@AKK5I the industrial revolution had a lot of skepticism as well, but ended up great for humanity.
@@SamuelMM_Mitosis Why would AI benefit humanity as a whole?
I usually love your videos, but I hated how 90% of this video was just repeating similar company statements.
As a counter point, I liked the thing you hated about this vid 🤷
It's almost as if an AI voice was reading off a script written in ChatGPT.
I think he was just trying to drive the point home.
@@chronometa no way?!!!! You think?
It's necessary
Ashton Kutcher openly saying "as soon as you go public you have to start manipulating your numbers and lying in your reports, which fucks over customers the most" is so crazy to me. Like do you not hear yourself
This is a great video, but i noticed a few things that could be improved:
- The section around 8:35 feels too long, it feels like you're tying to hit a word count by listing out each company in detail instead of preserving video flow by making each example short and to the point
- editing mistake at 18:15
- The section at 18:15 has poor transitions, you could say something like "next, let's look at wayfair", rather than reading out the "wayfair" title card on your essay.
This is written like an essay you read out, not like a video essay. There's a subtle difference but you can feel it. Look at wendover productions or real life lore for a point of comparison.
AI is just the latest grift in a long list of grifts, aimed at investors
Nvidia made bank 🤣🤣🤣
I worked for a company that basically got scammed into buying a multimillion dollar data tracking app. It improved nothing, the data collected was never used.
The stock market is about hype. Which I believe is your point.
Snake oil has been with us for a very long time it just went from concoctions of alcohol to 1s and 0s.
Was this video rushed? There seems to be many editing mistakes, such as repeating words or very fast cuts.
ngl thats a lot of his videos, there's always some random audio cuts for some reason
He also doesn't say thank you for watching. He's all about views and money. He won't last. I just unsubbed.
@@xKarenWalkerx not that I approve an unfinished product, but are you here editing or information? That's the way I evaluate things.
He probably USED AI lol.
Also the title is misleading. The video says very little about AI in Silicon Valley, and focused on Big Data.
Over 30 minutes of buildup to a ~ 5-minute rushed conclusion where he goes, "and AI is basically doing the same thing"
Data Scientist which also worked tech management consulting here, great video as always. My 5 cents is agreeing with other, big data has been overpromised, nobody has a competitive advantage in holding the most data. I would also say that cloud goes in here, it has been sold as a gold standard to help company be scalable and acompany big data. Many companies would be much better using on-prem solutions and do not need the scale. Everything is a very well packaged and branded product.
Regarding AI, I think people realized the use-case in the first weeks: code-completion, text generation and simple market research. Everything following those weeks is doomed to fail and underdeliver, I have yet to see a good implementation of gpts in any app or service I use, and then the technology has existed for 2.5 years.
AI is definitely useful and will save companies money and time but the idea that it is going to make an unprofitable business turn into a company with 30% gross margins is complete bullshit. Companies will never recoup their investment in AI because it leads to marginal improvements in efficiency overtime.
Hey man, love your content. I think the title should clarify that you're referring to Big Data implementation for corporations, not Artificial Intelligence like LLM's in general. 👍
Yeah poor understanding of what AI or AGI is
How are Large Language Models such as OpenAI's GPT-4o, Google's Gemini, or Meta's LLaMa any different from Big Data for corporations? These LLM AI require petabytes of data for training. There is now a boom in annotation gig jobs in India because the AI corporations now need even more data than what their Big Data infrastructure has already collected. AI is just the latest chapter in the Big Data story.
@@bornach well yeah. But they aren’t just LLMs. We are beyond that now. Transformer architecture is evolving.
@@bornach Great question! While both AI and big data involve massive amounts of data, AI, especially large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, goes beyond mere data storage and analysis. LLMs use this data to learn patterns, generate human-like text, and make predictions. Big data focuses on storing, processing, and analyzing vast datasets to extract insights. In contrast, AI applies these insights to create autonomous systems capable of complex tasks, such as understanding and generating human language, solving problems, and even learning from new data. So, AI leverages big data, but it also adds intelligence and adaptability.
It's a business channel, not a tech channel
A part of me thinks that stagnation over the years can be ascribed to rising big data tides lifting all ships -- if everyone invested in it and nobody gained a huge competitive advantage, everyone's spending enough $ on tech that's the new norm and things sort've just equal out. It'd be interesting to see if there are any comparable companies to those examined that didn't invest in big data -- did they go extinct? Did they see more profit due to not having to spend on tech?
Seeing the examples of revenues increasing precipitously while operating income plummets seems to be telling of something else. It could be due in part to profligate spending on big data and other tech, but It's almost as if wealth extraction is the goal and not long term sustained profit. Why work hard and create a business that works when you can expend much less time and effort and still be rewarding for getting a bunch of capital and running things into the ground?
At this point, AI is basically an additional abstraction layer, a slightly new UI. It can only do certain things well, and even then, it needs a lot of guidance. It is an innovation, but the idea of AGI, or some kind of “consciousness”, is wildly overblown. It can help you do things you couldn’t do before, but you have to really hold its hand to get anything useful out of it. The most impressive things it does are in media (Midjourney, etc), which is significant, but not going to replace a lot of humans. At the end of the day, it’s still computers. Just improved. I’m not even sure it makes many jobs easier, much less replacing anybody.
"Big data was just a pump & dump"
"Today's sponsor: Big data for entrepreneurs" 🙄
4:16 Dude the 100 clips at the beginning made me almost log off
I got a degree with a concentration of AI 30 years ago, publishing papers in machine learning. It was, effectively, fancy statistical analysis. By the time I graduated, I really bristled at the term "AI". There was nothing intelligent about it. Data, then BIG data, was hyping these techniques, which are clever and interesting but cannot reliably do the predictive work they were leaning into. I kept on saying to myself "It doesn't do that". Then "AI" blew up, mostly based on generative LLMs, which are not "AI" but basically stochastic BS generators, but doubling down on predictive techniques, WHICH STILL CANNOT DO THAT!!!
Thanks for this. Im a programmer, and AI is trash. All of it is about it's "potential" but in practicality, it's just a useful side tool that in no way thinks like humans
Lol get a new job mate
@@Kudagraz honestly even if I'm wrong, which I could be, programming is still a good job. I use AI to write basic stuff and then fix the things I need to (which is a lot every time). But AI can't and never should control itself, so any future devs out there shouldn't be discouraged, as that will just create different jobs for us. Also I could join the hype train and catch on with one of these pump and dump AI start ups... Idk, just like crypto, it feels dirty to do something I know is bull
@@patrickconrad396Thanks for a rational response to a pointless troll jibe.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS VIDEO!! my company uses Salesforce and I am sick and tired of them saying how great AI is. AI is not trustworthy and a scam
We had an entire decade of companies touting big data and hyperfocused personalized marketing, yet somehow youtube still occasionally shows me ads in Spanish
Big fan and loved the concept of this video, but feel that the "data driven fomo" chapter was a little under-baked and needed another edit. Too many quotes and not enough analysis, particularly when the quotes were largely undifferentiated.
Keep up the great work, love you vids!
I think the companies that made big data work the the ones you’ll never hear from. They are not data companies or startups that need to promote their actions in order to raise money. Rather they’re companies that make money through some other primary means and their use of data gives them an edge that they don’t need to share too much about publicly. One example might be casinos and their use of data to increase the play time and bet size of players. They don’t need to advertise this heavily but we all know casinos collect and use their data.
I think the same will be true for AI. Companies making the LLMs will eventually be making commodity products. The next tier of value (beyond infrastructure) will be from the business created on top of the LLM and there will be many public failures. But there will be companies that never talk about their use of LLMs and machine learning who were able to integrate it and move hundreds of millions of dollars down to the bottom line.
Not even. Google's search algo is big data, Amazon's recommender algorithm is too, RUclips's algo is big data, Netflix, anything making suggestions...it's kind of silly.
@@kangaroomax8198 the video showed also example of many buissness that used "suggestions' to recommend their products yet they failed.
what i understood from this video is that business should not follow tech hype traines and implement tech to just look "cool" but to implement it when the business really needs it.
Are they really? Exploiting degenerate gamblers is not something that requires smart decision making, what it requires is lack of morals and money to pay off politicians to stop small competition.
@@hamzix6599 Tech and data can't save a bad business. The lesson here is that some businesses are poorly run and unprofitable, not that there's anything wrong with big data or AI.
@@kangaroomax8198
and thats what i am saying don't have tech to look cool but to target specific issues that tech can really solve
Spot on. I'd say AI Hype is the hoax, not AI.
1. The hype for AI's "potential" has unfortunately drowned it's current true marvel. It's actually awesome.
2. Latest breakthroughs in ML fully depend on very large amounts of data, and ability to process it. NVIDIAs rapid growth is proof of that.
3. The world actually runs on data. Ads, Recommndations, Map Services, Prices etc.
4. The value is not just in having lots of it, but what you (can) do with it.
The difference is Lots of Hard Disks VS Scientific Breakthroughs.