←back to thread

LLM Inevitabilism

(tomrenner.com)
1612 points SwoopsFromAbove | 8 comments | | HN request time: 0.021s | source | bottom
Show context
delichon ◴[] No.44567913[source]
If in 2009 you claimed that the dominance of the smartphone was inevitable, it would have been because you were using one and understood its power, not because you were reframing away our free choice for some agenda. In 2025 I don't think you can really be taking advantage of AI to do real work and still see its mass adaptation as evitable. It's coming faster and harder than any tech in history. As scary as that is we can't wish it away.
replies(17): >>44567949 #>>44567951 #>>44567961 #>>44567992 #>>44568002 #>>44568006 #>>44568029 #>>44568031 #>>44568040 #>>44568057 #>>44568062 #>>44568090 #>>44568323 #>>44568376 #>>44568565 #>>44569900 #>>44574150 #
NBJack ◴[] No.44567951[source]
Ironically, this is exactly the technique for arguing that the blog mentions.

Remember the revolutionary, seemingly inevitable tech that was poised to rewrite how humans thought about transportation? The incredible amounts of hype, the secretive meetings disclosing the device, etc.? That turned out to be the self-balancing scooter known as a Segway?

replies(12): >>44567966 #>>44567973 #>>44567981 #>>44567984 #>>44567993 #>>44568067 #>>44568093 #>>44568163 #>>44568336 #>>44568442 #>>44568656 #>>44569295 #
HPsquared ◴[] No.44567966[source]
1. The Segway had very low market penetration but a lot of PR. LLMs and diffusion models have had massive organic growth.

2. Segways were just ahead of their time: portable lithium-ion powered urban personal transportation is getting pretty big now.

replies(3): >>44568065 #>>44568101 #>>44568795 #
jdiff ◴[] No.44568065[source]
Massive, organic, and unprofitable. And as soon as it's no longer free, as soon as the VC funding can no longer sustain it, an enormous fraction of usage and users will all evaporate.

The Segway always had a high barrier to entry. Currently for ChatGPT you don't even need an account, and everyone already has a Google account.

replies(2): >>44568094 #>>44568113 #
etaioinshrdlu ◴[] No.44568113[source]
This is wrong because LLMs are cheap enough to run profitably on ads alone (search style or banner ad style) for over 2 years now. And they are getting cheaper over time for the same quality.

It is even cheaper to serve an LLM answer than call a web search API!

Zero chance all the users evaporate unless something much better comes along, or the tech is banned, etc...

replies(1): >>44568161 #
scubbo ◴[] No.44568161[source]
> LLMs are cheap enough to run profitably on ads alone

> It is even cheaper to serve an LLM answer than call a web search API

These, uhhhh, these are some rather extraordinary claims. Got some extraordinary evidence to go along with them?

replies(2): >>44568184 #>>44568437 #
haiku2077 ◴[] No.44568184{7}[source]
https://www.snellman.net/blog/archive/2025-06-02-llms-are-ch..., also note the "objections" section

Anecdotally thanks to hardware advancements the locally-run AI software I develop has gotten more than 100x faster in the past year thanks to Moore's law

replies(2): >>44568256 #>>44568289 #
oblio ◴[] No.44568256{8}[source]
What hardware advancement? There's hardly any these days... Especially not for this kind of computing.
replies(2): >>44568338 #>>44568593 #
Sebguer ◴[] No.44568338{9}[source]
Have you heard of TPUs?
replies(2): >>44568390 #>>44568668 #
1. oblio ◴[] No.44568390{10}[source]
Yeah, I'm a regular Joe. How do I get one and how much does it cost?
replies(1): >>44568723 #
2. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.44568723[source]
If your goal is "a TPU" then you buy a mac or anything labeled Copilot+. You'll need about $600. RAM is likely to be your main limit.

(A mid to high end GPU can get similar or better performance but it's a lot harder to get more RAM.)

replies(2): >>44568946 #>>44569079 #
3. haiku2077 ◴[] No.44568946[source]
$500 if you catch a sale at Costco or Best Buy!
4. oblio ◴[] No.44569079[source]
I want something I can put in my own PC. GPUs are utterly insane in pricing, since for the good stuff you need at least 16GB but probably a lot more.
replies(1): >>44569167 #
5. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.44569167{3}[source]
9060 XT 16GB, $360

5060 Ti 16GB, $450

If you want more than 16GB, that's when it gets bad.

And you should be able to get two and load half your model into each. It should be about the same speed as if a single card had 32GB.

replies(1): >>44576172 #
6. oblio ◴[] No.44576172{4}[source]
> And you should be able to get two and load half your model into each. It should be about the same speed as if a single card had 32GB.

This seems super duper expensive and not really supported by the more reasonably priced Nvidia cards, though. SLI is deprecated, NVLink isn't available everywhere, etc.

replies(1): >>44576381 #
7. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.44576381{5}[source]
No, no, nothing like that.

Every layer of an LLM runs separately and sequentially, and there isn't much data transfer between layers. If you wanted to, you could put each layer on a separate GPU with no real penalty. A single request will only run on one GPU at a time, so it won't go faster than a single GPU with a big RAM upgrade, but it won't go slower either.

replies(1): >>44579300 #
8. oblio ◴[] No.44579300{6}[source]
Interesting, thank you for the feedback, it's definitely worth looking into!