this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2025
983 points (99.2% liked)

Fuck AI

5008 readers
801 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 77 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

It recently occurred to me that OpenAI is using the MoviePass model.

  • Operating at a huge loss.
  • Get a bunch of investment
  • Try to strong arm other companies into giving you a piece of the profits
  • Fraud

Didn't work out so well for MoviePass.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I bought 15 dollars of Moviepass long after it failed because I wondered if the marketing had value.

It did not.

There was zero value.

[–] ronigami@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

It probably did actually, but the thing also is that it was being run by idiots

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 8 points 2 weeks ago

moviepass had some value eventhough it was over-inflated and gougy, LLM had no value to people.

[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Only because MoviePass failed (to become a monopoly).

Something like OpenAI forces investors to operate on a Sunk Cost Fallacy, where they'd rather keep bailing out the company than lose what they'd already invested. Nearly every commercially successfully corporation has followed this exact model.

Once you reach Walmart/Amazon status (ie. household name) you're "too big to fail". Not until something else comes along to replace you. Actual business success is negligible once you're a monopoly.

McDonald's is the shittiest fastfood chain on the planet and continuously going downhill, but not once has the company ever been in danger of shutting down. They've only continuously expanded until they convinced all consumers there was no better alternative.

And last I checked, people have begun to embrace ChatGPT in the same teeth-gritting fashion as McDick.

It might just cave like Vine, or it might outright replace Google. At this point, could go either way.

[–] szczuroarturo@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yeach thats human fallacy in the work. Way too much brand loyalty.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 52 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Reminds me so much of WeWork.

The profit's coming guys! Just another trillion, that's all we need!

[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Just another billion dollars, bro. Trust me bro.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 7 points 2 weeks ago

Just one more lane.

[–] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

At least wework had some bangin offices to work out of. Now they are overpriced, getting ratty and basically there's been no investment. Last time I worked out of one I think they charged like $60 CAD, that's a lot for a day in a shared desk.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 7 points 2 weeks ago

well, it wasn't really their offices...

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A coworker of mine worked in one for a time and loved it. WeWork's problem was that they inexplicably overpaid for all of the real estate they bought, so other office rental companies (who were managing their finances professionally) were eating their lunch.

And, you know, letting Adam Neumann plunder the company for his own personal gain, which I'm absolutely certain Altman is doing.

[–] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

Pretty much every company at this point has executives plundering. It's like de facto in our times. There's such a divide opening.

[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

That 2015 pic makes me understand why Peter Thiel was such a fan. He was kind of a cute twink actually.

[–] dovahking@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago

Never have I been so regretful of learning English before reading this sentence.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

altman met his husband during one of THIELS parties at the time, strange coincidence he started openai after it. thiel has ties to epstein too. I wonder how far gawker couldve gone if they wernt sued to the ground due to a vendetta by Thiel, they were definitely reporting on some of suspicious business pratices.

Thiel side piece was young male model who was defenestrated last year in florida, and largely buried by MSM and even on reddit it dint last a day, he definitely has a type.

[–] Afaithfulnihilist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Taking a page from the Russian oligarch playbook and tossing your mistress out of a window because they threaten to expose you is just one more cartoonishly evil thing Peter Thiel did.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

How else do you expect thiel to fight the anti-christ? He's doing the hard work for all of us. Show some respect. \s

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What really tells it for the scam that it is would be to overlay that with this dipshit's personal wealth over the same period.

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The line between the stock market/investors and degenerate gamblers is a fine one.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

There's a line?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 weeks ago

fools...it will be $0,000,000,000,000 in 5 years.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

an interesting fun fact about altman, he met his husband at one of THIELs POOL parties, its not by accident around 2015.

[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

What do you mean 'not by accident around 2015'? Is there something significant about 2015 or are you tying it to Trump's presidential run?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Shouldn't there be an actual number that The Altman has essentially burned, in front of all those zeros, and behind the negative symbol? Otherwise it seems to be saying that they are still almost liquid.

[–] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 14 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

How come regulations haven't made them stop using that misleading name already ?

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 44 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Regulations in the US? Surely you jest.

[–] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] tym@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

to congress with you! you'll fit right in!

[–] 790@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 weeks ago

Regulations haven't even stopped YouTube from sending fake AI medical ads to your family members.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

USA is entirely based on lies. That's a big part of why "AI" is so popular.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Those zeroes are off, right? Aren't we WELL into the billions in sunk costs?

[–] ZDL@lazysoci.al 1 points 2 weeks ago

For stupid reasons, negative profits aren't called negative profits. They're called losses. So a company that's losing money is showing 0 profit. (And a company that's making money is showing 0 loss.)

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 2 weeks ago

I believe that Sammy Altman and OpenAI can get into the trillions!

[–] mrmanager@lemmy.today 11 points 2 weeks ago

The face of someone who wants to raise children with chat gpt.

[–] herrwoland@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Shouldn't the profit be more like -$20B or something? Since they're actively losing money

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In business, they don't like to talk about negative profits. Those are called losses.

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Let's ask AI!

[–] Little8Lost@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I like to imagine that the "-" indicates its negative (i know a negative 0 makes no sense but it sounds fitting)