184 Comments

And the amount of energy they are devoting to this is outrageous. Instead of restarting nuclear power plants and upgrading our grid to give ACTUAL people cheap, reliable energy, they are doing this to create FAKE people that no one wants or needs. The self-styled prophets need to get their heads out of their asses and work their way through Ted's reading list and go back to the drawing board.

Expand full comment

The solution is to launch billionaires into outer space. Or at least tax all their money and power away from them.

Expand full comment

#Miasmo2024

Expand full comment

See also Vonnegut's 'The Big Space Fxxx'

Expand full comment

Ohh, Mr Vonnegut. Yes. Or Mark Twain’s wry observations about our fellow citizens…

Expand full comment

The only reason they are pushing dangerous nuclear energy is to power their insanely wasteful AI-driven technology. More than 50 years ago, smart people realized we needed to think about conserving energy and transitioning to less deadly sources, but they were soon pushed aside by neoliberalism and its endless pursuit of higher profits for the mega-rich. And of course, the path of least resistance (keep driving bigger vehicles, buy stuff in plastic containers, throw everything away, use more power for more devices, etc) will always be easier to sell than the alternatives.

AI may just be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back. Imagine the computing power needed to continuously compile all the existing information on earth in order to generate bad poetry, wrong answers to simple questions, bots that manipulate kids, and cars that don't know how to stay on the road. Oh brave new world that hath such people in't.

Expand full comment

A nuclear energy renaissance may end up being the best aspect of all of this

Expand full comment

If it were for clean energy for real people, generally, along with natgas, the other clean(er) energy source. Right now, the revival is narrowly focused on powering AI.

Expand full comment

More people die installing solar panels and wind turbines than have ever died from nuclear power.

Expand full comment

Tangent… according to me it’s a fact that nuclear waste is one of the best aspects of nuclear energy. Why? All the bad is contained, managed and stored safely out of the environment. There’s also, like 90-95% reclaimable energy. Meanwhile I’ve seen a figure of fossil pollution prematurely killing roughly 40 million per year worldwide. Not to mention the bad health and misery.

Expand full comment

Only people who've never known someone slowly dying from the fallout from a nuclear power plant meltdown can continue to push nuclear energy. My dear friend Julia, who lived too close to Chernobyl, when she was growing up, and who was working with me in her late twenties but kept getting all these illnesses until she ended up dying, would disagree, and so do I.

Expand full comment

Not only AI - think of all the huge energy suck from the push Crypto. What a Scam !

Expand full comment

Edit: the Push For Crypto

Expand full comment

Small modular nuclear reactors. Clean. Safe. Efficient. For the foreseeable future.

Expand full comment

According to an AI I just queried, there is enough nuclear material already mined to power the whole world for at least several hundred years, if the infrastructure was built to use it. Since it doesn't produce much carbon, it would help with global warming too. It's a shame they don't use it more often. It's one of the safest forms of energy production statistically. I like the idea of small modular reactors.

Expand full comment

And we need sustainable power for everything, including transportation, manufacturing, medicine, food production, security, heating and cooling, life. Our power needs are not only due to data centers, crypto-mining, and AI. The distributed small modular reactors are included in the Department of Energy government web site. This is not a peripheral concept. It is viable and sustainable.

Expand full comment
Oct 28·edited Oct 28

I live 65 miles from Three Mile Island and am in *no* hurry for any nuclear power plants to get fired up! TMI + Chernobyl + Fukushima = that particular tech can go drastically wrong due to human error. I don't think it's worth the risk - far too many people have died due to their efforts to clean up the worst in Ukraine and Japan. Who knows when, if ever, the environmental contamination caused by the catastrophes at Chernobyl and Fukushima will become negligible enough for humans to live in those areas again? Not in our lifetimes, I'm sure.

Expand full comment

That is such a great point Joshua. They can ramp up a nuclear power plant almost overnight and our government is still holding their hands on their arses

Expand full comment

AI uses about the same energy as bitcoin from a quick google search. I've always deplored bitcoin for this very reason.

But AI is not an empty use of energy like bitcoin. When well used it will create productivity gains (and happier humans, see research on improved call centre interactions due to AI help). I also think it quite likely that AI assisted innovations in green tech will sooner or later cover this 'bitcoin' equivalent energy cost.

Not to undermine Ted's reading list. A tool can't replace the need of using the tool wisely.

Expand full comment

We've had AI for decades, and there are countless useful applications. But these massive LLMs are not going to lead to general intelligence. The human mind is much more efficient without reading the entire internet.

Expand full comment

This opens a wonderful can of worms.

What is general intelligence, what is mind, is soul real (it somehow seems necessary to the previous two), what is soul (assuming it is real), can artifice have soul.

I hope Ted gets into some of these topics (i'm a newbie around here if he already has).

Expand full comment

Amen!

Expand full comment

And let's not forget the amount of energy it takes to run AI. By some estimates it's already equal to the amount it takes to run single countries.

Expand full comment

Once again, Ted, nail on the head. Human beings want and need other human beings. Millions of years of evolution will not be undone by a few overly confident guys who like the idea of their own cleverness, who are solving problems nobody asked for, some of their own making, in their own imaginations. I feel like the implosion of VR and AI might be just what the doctor ordered. Maybe even usher in a new era or sanity. Or at least a respite from the relentless hype. I’m tired of living in a world of “joyless urgency”, as Marilynn Robinson has characterized our times. Cut me a slice of your cake and I’ll put on the party tunes!

Expand full comment

On the other hand basically all tech companies (at least where I am) are now requiring engineers use AI assistance in coding. I think there will be a lot more immediate impact in business processes than in the consumer space. Although I think one interesting phenomenon will be the commodification of content — whether or not people strictly “prefer” human generated-content to AI-generated content, there will be so much AI generated content that the content space will be one giant TikTok, with users constantly scrolling through endless content (mediocre though it might be) making it almost impossible for any particular piece of content to break through for anything more than 15 minutes of fame — like say the lifetime of the Hawk Tuah meme max for even breakout content.

Expand full comment

I am SO glad I got out of software engineering when I did (a couple of years ago, after over 35 years). Not too long ago I was watching a golf tournament and there was a recurring ad from (I think) Microsoft that showed the engineer using a coding assistant. For the life of me I don’t know how you get satisfaction out of the work when you’re no longer doing it. I worked in the embedded medical space where there are serious regulatory issues with using these things.

Oh, and then there were the ads for golf clubs that used AI in the design process. I guess it helps when explaining to the wife why you dropped $600 bucks for that new driver. ;-)

Expand full comment

Sure, and serious, probably insuperable, liability issues are looming for any serious attempt to replace humans in fiduciary roles, not just for rote technical knowledge.

Expand full comment

...they will never stop selling us what we don't need...

Expand full comment

At some point there will be shortages of all the stuff we actually need. Only then the culture of hypnotizing people out of their self-esteem to sell them crap they don't need will die.

Expand full comment

Like affordable and appropriate healthcare?!

Expand full comment

...just wait for the a.i. therapists!...

Expand full comment

They already exist. You need to transition.

Expand full comment

…i should become an a.i. therapist?…

Expand full comment

Interesting idea and a contradiction at the same time.

Expand full comment

…i like you old but i will be honest…ai doing human stuff doesnt sound interesting it sounds diabolical…no one needs ai love…

Expand full comment

But too many people buy into it for the consumer high.

Expand full comment

...we do love doing what we are told to do...

Expand full comment

Yep, like sheep

Expand full comment

...i don't know man...i've seen some unruly free roaming sheep out there :)...we might be worse...to these companies we are minnows and chum...someone should force Tim Cook to wear those jaggoff-goggles eight hours a day in office...

Expand full comment

These are the billionaire ventriloquists trying to make us sheep that's for sure.

Expand full comment

...with a.i. they definitely want their words in our mouths...perverts the lot of them...sick beasts empty of virtue...we should toss them into a field of wolves with steak diapers on...

Expand full comment

And the high of likes and feeling like everyone is paying attention to all their online posts and actions.

Expand full comment

The fail of fakery is some of the best news I've heard in connection with these companies. In the end, reality and human creations will outshine and outlast all of these ventures. I think just as we have an instinctive phobia of animals that can threaten our life, we experience a similar reaction to "AI slop". When I listened to an AI podcast that was generated based on an article that my husband and I had written, my first reaction was amazement quickly followed by disgust (you can listen to it here https://pilgrimsinthemachine.substack.com/p/the-ai-curse-is-coming-for-the-creators). And thus I deeply agree with Ted that we will ultimately prefer real music, real literature, and real creation over the fake.

Expand full comment

I can't even imagine anyone perferring AI music and art. The best part is the "mistakes" a lot of the time.

Expand full comment

Fully agreed there but also very predictable. From someone who worked over 20 years in tech, I have seen my share of hypes that ended being total duds and I have eventually built a sixth sense about what will stick and what will become another 'google glass.' Silicon Valley is so enamored with its self-reflection that it (conveniently?) forgets about the societal or ethical impact.

From my conversations with people at the higher spheres at TikTok, they (and other companies out there) have resigned themselves that AI will NOT bring the expected ROI... at least not for this round. AI has existed for years; it was simply dubbed ML (Machine Learning) or Big Data at some point. Currently, the technology is evolutionary, not revolutionary. The question is: are the 'Magnificent Seven' CEOs truly out-of-touch with reality, or is this another instance of "look over here" while something else is at work over there.

Whether the latest episodes of VR or AI are duds is almost irrelevant. They have the power to mobilize a whole planet around the latest invention, gadget, or fad and occupy the airwaves until the rest of us mortals realize we've been taken for a long PR ride. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of people have been laid off pre-emptively to boost stock prices, these companies have consolidated their power by buying patents and smaller competitors, they are slowly moving into the utility and power generation (nuclear power) sector, and they are now able to manipulate public opinion by holding the specter of AI-powered deep-fakes to censor whatever they deem 'misinformation / disinformation' (with the tacit directions of DC elites). With this much cash flow and valuations in the Trillions of dollars, they can afford several of these (so-called) "gaffes" and still come out on top.

Expand full comment

Well said and great insight. With this election cycle the thing that has stood out the most to me is all the big U.S. technocrats entering the space and seemingly having become so powerful they are becoming bigger than either candidate and are quickly evolving into the biggest threats to democracy outside of you know who.

Expand full comment

Sadly, the same CEOs complain about government waste and how successful people shouldn't "give" the government any money because the government throws good money after bad.

Expand full comment

Or will AI be used to further control through government our speech and behaviour? It's hard to say.

Expand full comment

Once again Ted- I love you Guy, but you’re completely wrong about Apple.

Tim Cook has said many many times he *hates* VR and Apple’s true focus is Augmented Reality. It was never Apple’s intention to be at the forefront of Virtual Reality.

The Vision Pro was only one necessary step in technology towards the goal of creating stylish, amazing headwear to replace normal glasses which will do everything that you carry in your pants- your wallet, your keys, your music, and your phone.

Consider the miracle of the Apple Watch. It can literally do everything that your phone does, on your wrist. The Apple Glasses will be the next step in miniaturization.

In the meantime, having mastered eye tracking and a proper OS, you can bet they are focusing on lens technology (the major hurdle) and power issues. The Vision Pro is only a stepping stone towards a bigger goal.

Expand full comment

Stylish - he just looks like a tit!

Expand full comment

Did you read my post? VR is not Apple’s goal. Tim will sell it to push the necessary technology forward- but he has said many many times in the past that he absolutely hates VR.

Expand full comment

What a Laugh. But ya see - since I already have these things in my pocket - WHAT is the problem ? No- don't need the "miracle" of the Apple Watch or the "Stylish" next goofy BS. AND ,by the way - my phone is just a phone for me ,nothing else. So I only have 3 of these things you mentioned. I don't need to carry around 3 millions pics I will never look at or 10 million Playlists I won't listen to.

Expand full comment

Ted-I think you've made a miscalculation in focusing on this one admittedly absurd aspect of AI. On the up side, the potential usefulness of AI in science and medicine is already happening. On many other levels, it's a pretty dire prognosis, but Ai is not apt to fade away the way the Metaverse did.

It will remain a serious threat to artists of every kind. Anyone interested in this may consider signing onto a petition I posted on-https://artsfuse.org/300101/arts-advocacy-sign-our-petition-an-open-letter-to-generative-ai-leaders/

And, over the past few months, some of the key players in AI development have begun publically warning us that even the experts can't explain the rapidity of AI evolution and its movement toward self-awareness. It's not an hysterical notion that we have set in motion something whose parameters we cannot control.

Expand full comment

Machines will never be self-aware. They may be able to _simulate_ self-awareness pretty well, but they won't actually _be_ self-aware.

The risk of AI is that people will misuse it, not that the machines will rise up and overthrow their human masters.

Expand full comment

That does seem impossible, but just like one wouldn’t claim to understand the mysteries in the universe I don’t think one should jump to conclusions that something can’t be done when the type of intelligence and computing power we are talking about when things like quantum fields enter in and so many other aspects we don’t fully understand even with the greatest human intelligence begin to enter in its hard to know future intelligence and knowledge and capabilities from the lookout point and perspective of where we stand today.

Not trying to say you’re wrong just I don’t think we can actually fully know that’s not possible.

Expand full comment

Something doesn't have to be sentient to be dangerous; nuclear weapons aren't, and we came pretty close to blowing ourselves up in the 80s with them.

Expand full comment

The demise of the ridiculous VR craziness is so encouraging, we must hope (and work) toward a similar fate for AI (which I wish people would think of as “algorithmic idiocy” instead of slandering the word intelligence.

Machines can help mankind, but not replace human intelligence. It is a fool’s errand to try.

It will be a salutary sign when technology mavens focus on expanding their usefulness in reality, instead of trying to narrow reality in order to fit their money-making schemes.

Reality is so much more interesting. Making money may be necessary, but it’s boring.

Expand full comment

Totally adopting “Algorithmic Idiocy” 😎

Expand full comment

Currently I'm studying to become a teacher and it's bizarre how big a gap there is between university and primary school.

At uni I have to pledge every time I use their portal that AI will not be part of my studies; while I watch teachers use it to generate assignments for their students in the school where I work.

Expand full comment
Oct 28·edited Oct 28

Ted... designing stuff for VR is still a thing for many game developers. Whether it gets off the ground or not, who knows?

But that's very much separate from Meta, et. al. and this boy's tragic death. I understand why you're talking about both AI chatbots and VR, but they're not identical. (Comparable, maybe, but I don't see them as conflatable.) And not *all* AI is evil. If you look through some recent science reporting, you'll see that AI has been successfully used to discover far more extensive settlements, graves, ruins, etc. at various archaeological sites - things that didn't show up via ground-penetrating radar alone. Also true of the Nazca Lines and other man-made carvings in the Atacama Desert - they're far more extensive than anyone ever guessed, and the use of AI helped researchers find and map those literally unseeable (to the human eye) sections of terrain.

My hunch is that newer forms of AI *can* be - are being - used in ways that aren't destructive. I do understand why you feel as you do about generative AI, as I share your qualms. But as with any tech, it's the uses it's put to that are good, bad or indifferent, not the tech per se.

Am aware that my comments are gadfly-ish, but I honestly feel there needs to be some balance on this topic. Not all recent developments in AI are tied to the generative AI programs that you're talking about here.

As for corporate efforts falling flat, I'm not surprised. Those things were gambles, and people like Mark Zuckerberg threw way too much money at them. Also occurred with 3-D TV and the last super hi- res cinematography format that landed with a thud. (Iirc, Ang Lee shot an entire film using it and preview audiences found it unwatchable.)

Expand full comment
Oct 28·edited Oct 28

An aside: Ted, last year (or early this year?) you posted about the Romantic movement as counter to the Industrial Revolution.

The thing is, tech innovations are directly responsible for the creation of the instrument you play. Absent all of that, you (and other keyboard players) would still be using fortepianos, clavichords and the like.

By the same token, the invention of the metal paint tube in the early 19th c. = the development of Impressionism and plein air painting in general. Prior to that, there weren't any adequate containers for pigments that were leakproof. What artists used - clay and glass jars for the colors they'd blended into an oil medium - were heavy and cumbersome. That changed drastically once the paint tube came into circulation. Painters could go outside and mix colors on thr spot.

Then there was the advancement of theatrical lighting from setups with open flames to electric lightbulbs. If you look into the history of ballet in the early-mid 19th c., you'll inevitably run into accounts of dancers whose costumes caught fire...and the dancers burned to death.

It does feel like you tend to view all tech as negative. If we apply that to day to day life, then we'd better toss our electric lights, fridges/freezers, ovens, dishwashers, cars, TVs, radios, etc.

Tech per se is neutral. It's how we humans use it that's either beneficial or problematic (or somewhere in between).

Expand full comment

Good piece, thank you.

But for the record, Apple did not invent the PC, the graphic interface or the cell phone. They held back & then did equivalents that were easier to use, thus growing the market.

Expand full comment

Ironic post…just last night, I was thinking about how much of an impact technology created by Bell Labs & Xerox’ PARC have had on our society over the past 50-70 years.

Expand full comment

Good comments. So what's next? meta's RayBan glasses are taking off, and there is much more that could be integrated into them. I'll bet AAPL is already working on the next generation features. He's a piece on how well the RayBan's are selling: https://www.uploadvr.com/ray-ban-meta-glasses-top-selling-emea/

Expand full comment

I struggle to think of a single apple product that wasn't already done by someone, their entire business has been not to be the first. There is a joke that android users have, 6 months after it comes out on Android it'll be the brand new mind blowing feature of the next iPhone, apple has always been about design and marketing not innovation.

Expand full comment

This is a case of large corporations losing touch with their customers. The large corporations give us what THEY think we want. They don’t ask us what WE want. So develop a product (the boss really likes), list it for sale, and sit back and watch the $$ roll in…except it doesn’t.

Expand full comment

AI has to crash at some point. It’s not totally useless but it’s not even approaching the usefulness they pretend it has. The sheer amount of power and money it’s burning is incredible. Ed Zitron has good points about it all.

https://www.wheresyoured.at/oai-business/

Expand full comment

And don't forget to add in the growing Energy suck - Crypto.

Expand full comment

I don’t like celebrating people’s failure too much but I’m not surprised people aren’t wearing the goggles

Expand full comment

The reason Celebration is in order - it is being forced on us all at an ever accelerating rate.

Expand full comment

What’s an example

Expand full comment