177
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2026
177 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
88814 readers
6084 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
What the article does not even mention is the increasing strength of the much cheaper Chinese OpenWeight models like Qwen.
To be clear, if a genie in a bottle would grant me a free wish, I would request that this technology disappears from existence at least until we have solved the climate problem, found a solution how to compensate creative people and artists, and remedy its impacts on democratic discourse and mental health. But while one is allowed to wish for a better future, this is not the reality we face.
I was requested at work to try out one of the local open weight models yesterday. They are not free, requiring substantial hardware costs, but require less energy than the US models. And it seems with a more modest and more sane approach, companies are not going to pay many hundreds of dollars per month per seat for Claude licences when they can do with far smaller costs.
True that the "weaker" models will still require substantial and qualified human oversight for things like software development, but fully autonomous systems are more like a febrile hypercapitalist pipe dream than something technically desirable.
This is exactly it.
When you run your AI in the cloud you are trading some privacy and security, as well as higher operating expenses, for convenience and lack of upfront cost. This is no different than any other cloud service.
Go back a decade and everybody said cloud is the only future, companies will throw their servers in the garbage, etc. Now a lot of companies have moved workloads back on premises because the simple fact is the cloud provider is buying the same servers and has to pay the same price for them you are just paying for that and also for their profit and overhead.
There's also the simple fact that even the best models have proven unsafe to be turned loose without human intervention. So if you have to have a human reviewing the output anyway, why pay a boatload more for slightly better output?
I just hope when this bubble pops there isn't some taxpayer bailout. Let OpenAI go bankrupt if that's what it takes. Let the idiots who financed data centers with blank checks lose their shirts. There needs to be a lesson for the next bubble.
Fully agree. Having been in the tech business for a week or two thousand, I am always surprised that the fundamental truism isn't widely distributed: cheap human assistance beats expensive self-driving every time.