Goldman is correct that AI is expensive and unreliable.
But it's only overhyped if AI stays that way.
The hype isn't coming from where AI is today, but where it will be in 2030 and 2040.
What excites the true believers is the slope, not the intercept.
Goldman Sachs has no reason to disseminate valuable market insights and analysis for free. All financial thinkpieces by investment firms should be disregarded as economic manipulation and propaganda
AI is enabling a new generation of exploits and hacks that will force tech to get a lot simpler, more human readable, and more privacy oriented.
Everything is going to need to be refactored for a world where bad actors have truly unlimited time and attention to invest in identifying privacy and security vulnerabilities.
News flash, stock related company says thing to influence market
Wow.
I did not imagine I would ever agree with Goldman Sachs on anything in my life.
Now, I do think it has its uses, but it's once again way overhyped like all the hypes that came before it. As always there is a certain use to it but it's way overblown.
It’s healthy for GS to express a contrarian opinion.
If GPT 5 doesn’t meet high expectations, another winter could soon arrive.
Really hard to disagree with Goldman Sachs on that one. There's no reason to believe in all this hype unless you are one of the many that are surfing, and making money, with it. Besides all those chatbots there is not a lot of AI products that are really useful to the everyday user.
Goldman Sachs is overhyped, overpaid, and unreliable.
Just remember: the only reason they threw a trillion dollars at genAI is because they thought they could lay off their entire creative staff
Actual report https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelligence/pages/gs-research/...
Right in the preamble
..despite these concerns and constraints, we still see room for the AI theme to run, either because AI starts to deliver on its promise, or because bubbles take a long time to burst.
It’s useful for turning unstructured data into structured data. And other similar repetitive tasks.
Not chatting with and asking to write something open ended that even you don’t know how to do.
They're early to this opinion, people will start to realize this en masse soon.
Digital coding assistants are here to stay, but not at the $10/month price point. Maybe $10/year.
I would have thought GS would be wise enough to not bully AI now in its early days just in case it ends up taking over the world.
I'm not going to read the whole paper, but I didn't find anything in the paper which used the words "overhyped" "wildly expensive," or "unreliable."
Unreliable for what? There's so many different ways which people use these services. The way I use them, it's not unreliable. Because I don't use these services in a way which would be unreliable.
Instead, it seems the broader conversation that the huge investment in AI might not pay off right away is very plausible. I pay $20 per month for one of these services. And that $20 service is maybe the most expensive to implement of anything I have paid $20 monthly by a long shot.
And this is important for the audience of Goldman Sachs. Maybe it's not so important for the typical reader of Hacker News. Who reads Goldman Sachs papers?
Quibbling a bit:
>questions whether generative AI will ever become the transformative technology that Silicon Valley and large portions of the stock market are currently betting on...
Who really cares if the AI is generative or not? AI is pretty much bound to be a transformative technology.
>higher productivity (which necessarily means automation, layoffs, lower labor costs...
Nah. It can also mean more stuff produced. And probably will.
That said current asset prices may well be a bit inflated. And some startup could come up with a better algo for self improving AGI rendering the other companies not worth much. Bit like how Google came along and rendered the other search companies not worth much.
HNers are wrong about this just like they're wrong about Tesla, and the proof is outside on the road.
Say what you will about GS, they are correct here.
Why do people not understand that such news come out of the woodwork when they have a big short position in the stock market.
[dead]
Goldman Sachs itself is overhyped, unreliable and expensive.
Also Goldman Sachs: uses quant algorithms for high speed trading at scale.
What a joke.
Discussions
(88 points, 12 days ago, 157 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40837081
(89 points, 1 week ago, 47 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40885632