Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy’s obsession here. The value is absolutely inflated but it’s definitely real value and LLMs are not going to disappear unless we create a better AI technology.
In general we’re way past the point of tech bubbles popping. Software markets move incredibly fast and are incredibly resilient to this. There literally hasn’t been a software bubble popping since dotcom boom. Prove me wrong.
Even if you see problems with LLMs and AI in general this hopeful doomerism is really not helping anyone. Now instead of spending effort on improving things people are these angry, passive, delusional accelerationists without any self awareness.
I mean we haven’t figured out how to make AI profitable yet, and though it’s a cool technology with real world use cases, nobody has proven yet that the juice is worth the squeeze. There’s an unimaginable amount of money tied up in a technology on the hope that one day they find a way to make it profitable and though AI as a technology “improves”, its journey towards providing more value than it costs to run is not.
If I roleplayed as somebody who desperately wanted AI to succeed, my first question would be “What is the plan to have AI make money?” And so far nobody, not even the technology’s biggest sycophants have an answer.
AI as a technology is so far not profitable for anybody. The hardware AI runs on is profitable, as might be some start ups that are heavily leveraging AI, but actually operating AI is so far not profitable, and because increasingly smaller improvements in AI use exponentially more power, there’s no real path that is visible to any of us today that suggests anyone’s yet found a path to profitability. Aside from some kind of miracle out of left field that no one today has even conceived, the long term outlook isn’t great.
If AI as a technology busts, so does the insane profits behind the hardware it runs on. And without that left field technological breakthrough, the only option to pursue to avoid AI going completely bust is to raise prices astronomically, which would bust any companies currently dependent on all the AI currently being provided to them for basically next to nothing.
The entire industry is operating at a loss, but is being propped up by the currently abstract idea that AI will some day make money. This isn’t the “AI Hater” viewpoint, it’s just the spot AI is currently in. If you think AI is here to stay, you’re placing a bet on a promise that nobody as of today can actually make.
Delusion? Ok let’s get it straight from the horse’s mouth then. I’ve asked ChatGPT if OpenAI is profitable, and to explain its financial outlook. What you see below, emphasis and emojis, are generated by ChatGPT:
—ChatGPT—
OpenAI is not currently profitable. Despite its rapid growth, the company continues to operate at a substantial loss.
📊 Financial Snapshot
Annual recurring revenue (ARR) was reported at approximately $12 billion as of July 2025, implying around $1 billion per month in revenue.
Projected total revenue for 2025 is $12.7 billion, up from roughly $3.7 billion in 2024.
However, OpenAI’s cash burn has increased, with projected operational losses around $8 billion in 2025 alone
—end ChatGPT—
The most favorable projections are that OpenAI will not be cash positive (That means making a single dollar in profit) until it reached 129 billion dollars in revenue. That means that OPENAI has to make more than 10X their annual revenue to finally be profitable. And their current strategy to make more money is to expand their infrastructure to take on more customers and run more powerful systems. The problem is, the models require substantially more power to make moderate gains in accurate and capability. And every new AI datacenter means more land cost, engineers, water, and electricity. Compounding the issue is that the more electricity they use, the more it costs. NJ has paved the way for a number of new huge AI datacenters in the past few years and the cost of electricity in the state has skyrocketed. People are seeing their monthly electric bills raised by 50-150% in the last couple months alone. Thats forcing not only people out of their homes, but eats substantially into revenue growth for data centers. It’s quite literally a race for AI companies to reach profitability before hitting the natural limits to the resources they require to expand. And I haven’t heard a peep about how they expect to do so.
You use one company thats is spearheading the entire industry as your example that no AI company is profitable. Either you are argueing in extremely bad faith or you’re invredibly stupid I’m sorry.
Thats like saying ride hailing and food delivery is not profitable because Uber is not profitable in the US.
I work in a profitable AI company and can list you a hundred more. I’m not sure what’s the point of this delusional lie?
No startup is profitable - thats by design because profit seeking is not what makes your company successful. No wonder average American struggles financially with this poor understanding of basic financing.
Cleaely you’re argueing in bad faith and I see no point in educating you so continue to stew in your hate while everyone else grows, bye.
Dotcom was a bubble too and it popped hard with huge faillout even though the internet didn’t disappear and it still was and is a revolutionary thing that changed how we live our lives.
The value a thing creates is only part of whether the investment into it is worth it.
It’s entirely possible that all of the money that is going into the AI bubble will create value that will ultimately benefit someone else, and that those who initially invested in it will have nothing to show for it.
In the late 90’s, U.S. regulatory reform around telecom prepared everyone for an explosion of investment in hard infrastructure assets around telecommunications: cell phones were starting to become a thing, consumer internet held a ton of promise. So telecom companies started digging trenches and laying fiber, at enormous expense to themselves. Most ended up in bankruptcy, and the actual assets eventually became owned by those who later bought those assets for pennies on the dollar, in bankruptcy auctions.
Some companies owned fiber routes that they didn’t even bother using, and in the early 2000’s there was a shitload of dark fiber scattered throughout the United States. Eventually the bandwidth needs of near universal broadband gave that old fiber some use. But the companies that built it had already collapsed.
If today’s AI companies can’t actually turn a profit, they’re going to be forced to sell off their expensive data at some point. Maybe someone else can make money with it. But the life cycle of this tech is much shorter than the telecom infrastructure I was describing earlier, so a stale LLM might very well become worthless within years. Or it’s only a stepping stone towards a distilled model that costs a fraction to run.
So as an investment case, I’m not seeing a compelling case for investing in AI today. Even if you agree that it will provide value, it doesn’t make sense to invest $10 to get $1 of value.
there’s an argument that this is just the targeted ads bubble that keeps inflating using different technologies. That’s where the money is coming from. It’s a game of smoke and mirrors, but this time it seems like they are betting big on a single technology for a longer time, which is different from what we have seen in the past 10 years.
Sort of agreed. I disagree with the people around here acting like AI will crash and burn, never to be seen again. It’s here to stay.
I do think this is a bubble and will pop hard. Too many players in the game, most are going to lose, but the survivors will be rich and powerful beyond imagining.
Willing to take real life money bet that bubble is not going to pop despite Lemmy’s obsession here. The value is absolutely inflated but it’s definitely real value and LLMs are not going to disappear unless we create a better AI technology.
In general we’re way past the point of tech bubbles popping. Software markets move incredibly fast and are incredibly resilient to this. There literally hasn’t been a software bubble popping since dotcom boom. Prove me wrong.
Even if you see problems with LLMs and AI in general this hopeful doomerism is really not helping anyone. Now instead of spending effort on improving things people are these angry, passive, delusional accelerationists without any self awareness.
I mean we haven’t figured out how to make AI profitable yet, and though it’s a cool technology with real world use cases, nobody has proven yet that the juice is worth the squeeze. There’s an unimaginable amount of money tied up in a technology on the hope that one day they find a way to make it profitable and though AI as a technology “improves”, its journey towards providing more value than it costs to run is not.
If I roleplayed as somebody who desperately wanted AI to succeed, my first question would be “What is the plan to have AI make money?” And so far nobody, not even the technology’s biggest sycophants have an answer.
The profit of ai lies in this: mass surveillance and ads. Thats it.
The revenue of AI lies in mass surveillance and ads. But even going full dystopia, that has not been enough to make AI companies profitable.
Millennials are killing the mass surveillance and advertising industry!
AI is absolutely profitable just not for everybody.
AI as a technology is so far not profitable for anybody. The hardware AI runs on is profitable, as might be some start ups that are heavily leveraging AI, but actually operating AI is so far not profitable, and because increasingly smaller improvements in AI use exponentially more power, there’s no real path that is visible to any of us today that suggests anyone’s yet found a path to profitability. Aside from some kind of miracle out of left field that no one today has even conceived, the long term outlook isn’t great.
If AI as a technology busts, so does the insane profits behind the hardware it runs on. And without that left field technological breakthrough, the only option to pursue to avoid AI going completely bust is to raise prices astronomically, which would bust any companies currently dependent on all the AI currently being provided to them for basically next to nothing.
The entire industry is operating at a loss, but is being propped up by the currently abstract idea that AI will some day make money. This isn’t the “AI Hater” viewpoint, it’s just the spot AI is currently in. If you think AI is here to stay, you’re placing a bet on a promise that nobody as of today can actually make.
Absolute delusion right here
Delusion? Ok let’s get it straight from the horse’s mouth then. I’ve asked ChatGPT if OpenAI is profitable, and to explain its financial outlook. What you see below, emphasis and emojis, are generated by ChatGPT:
—ChatGPT—
OpenAI is not currently profitable. Despite its rapid growth, the company continues to operate at a substantial loss.
📊 Financial Snapshot
Annual recurring revenue (ARR) was reported at approximately $12 billion as of July 2025, implying around $1 billion per month in revenue.
Projected total revenue for 2025 is $12.7 billion, up from roughly $3.7 billion in 2024.
However, OpenAI’s cash burn has increased, with projected operational losses around $8 billion in 2025 alone
—end ChatGPT—
The most favorable projections are that OpenAI will not be cash positive (That means making a single dollar in profit) until it reached 129 billion dollars in revenue. That means that OPENAI has to make more than 10X their annual revenue to finally be profitable. And their current strategy to make more money is to expand their infrastructure to take on more customers and run more powerful systems. The problem is, the models require substantially more power to make moderate gains in accurate and capability. And every new AI datacenter means more land cost, engineers, water, and electricity. Compounding the issue is that the more electricity they use, the more it costs. NJ has paved the way for a number of new huge AI datacenters in the past few years and the cost of electricity in the state has skyrocketed. People are seeing their monthly electric bills raised by 50-150% in the last couple months alone. Thats forcing not only people out of their homes, but eats substantially into revenue growth for data centers. It’s quite literally a race for AI companies to reach profitability before hitting the natural limits to the resources they require to expand. And I haven’t heard a peep about how they expect to do so.
You use one company thats is spearheading the entire industry as your example that no AI company is profitable. Either you are argueing in extremely bad faith or you’re invredibly stupid I’m sorry.
Of course I used the company that is the market leader in AI as an example that AI companies are not profitable you donut, that’s how that works.
They’re not the only AI company that’s not profitable, like I said none of them are. You can take your pick if you don’t like OpenAI as an example.
Thats like saying ride hailing and food delivery is not profitable because Uber is not profitable in the US.
I work in a profitable AI company and can list you a hundred more. I’m not sure what’s the point of this delusional lie?
No startup is profitable - thats by design because profit seeking is not what makes your company successful. No wonder average American struggles financially with this poor understanding of basic financing.
Cleaely you’re argueing in bad faith and I see no point in educating you so continue to stew in your hate while everyone else grows, bye.
Dotcom was a bubble too and it popped hard with huge faillout even though the internet didn’t disappear and it still was and is a revolutionary thing that changed how we live our lives.
Overvalued doesn’t mean the thing has no value.
The value a thing creates is only part of whether the investment into it is worth it.
It’s entirely possible that all of the money that is going into the AI bubble will create value that will ultimately benefit someone else, and that those who initially invested in it will have nothing to show for it.
In the late 90’s, U.S. regulatory reform around telecom prepared everyone for an explosion of investment in hard infrastructure assets around telecommunications: cell phones were starting to become a thing, consumer internet held a ton of promise. So telecom companies started digging trenches and laying fiber, at enormous expense to themselves. Most ended up in bankruptcy, and the actual assets eventually became owned by those who later bought those assets for pennies on the dollar, in bankruptcy auctions.
Some companies owned fiber routes that they didn’t even bother using, and in the early 2000’s there was a shitload of dark fiber scattered throughout the United States. Eventually the bandwidth needs of near universal broadband gave that old fiber some use. But the companies that built it had already collapsed.
If today’s AI companies can’t actually turn a profit, they’re going to be forced to sell off their expensive data at some point. Maybe someone else can make money with it. But the life cycle of this tech is much shorter than the telecom infrastructure I was describing earlier, so a stale LLM might very well become worthless within years. Or it’s only a stepping stone towards a distilled model that costs a fraction to run.
So as an investment case, I’m not seeing a compelling case for investing in AI today. Even if you agree that it will provide value, it doesn’t make sense to invest $10 to get $1 of value.
there’s an argument that this is just the targeted ads bubble that keeps inflating using different technologies. That’s where the money is coming from. It’s a game of smoke and mirrors, but this time it seems like they are betting big on a single technology for a longer time, which is different from what we have seen in the past 10 years.
Sort of agreed. I disagree with the people around here acting like AI will crash and burn, never to be seen again. It’s here to stay.
I do think this is a bubble and will pop hard. Too many players in the game, most are going to lose, but the survivors will be rich and powerful beyond imagining.