Most active commenters
  • lm28469(3)
  • schmidtleonard(3)

←back to thread

AI capex is so big that it's affecting economic statistics

(paulkedrosky.com)
337 points throw0101c | 15 comments | 18 Jul 25 19:59 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
oytis ◴[18 Jul 25 20:21 UTC] No.44609364[source]▶
I just hope when (if) the hype is over, we can repurpose the capacities for something useful (e.g. drug discovery etc.)
replies(16): >>44609452 #>>44609461 #>>44609463 #>>44609471 #>>44609489 #>>44609580 #>>44609632 #>>44609635 #>>44609712 #>>44609785 #>>44609958 #>>44609979 #>>44610227 #>>44610522 #>>44610554 #>>44610755 #
barbazoo ◴[18 Jul 25 20:45 UTC] No.44609635[source]▶
On the other hand, drug discovery sounds like it's a candidate for really benefitting from AI. To fuel AI model development, there maybe has to be all the garbage that comes with AI.
replies(1): >>44609674 #
1. lm28469 ◴[18 Jul 25 20:49 UTC] No.44609674[source]▶
What drugs? The leading causes of death are routine induced, 80% of cancers are caused by your environment, &c.

We have much better things to do with these billions

replies(3): >>44609752 #>>44609813 #>>44610345 #
2. ribosometronome ◴[18 Jul 25 20:57 UTC] No.44609752[source]▶
Drugs to cure the diseases caused by your environment. It's not as if people are suddenly going to be making perfect decisions (e.g. never getting a sunburn, not eating meat, avoiding sugary foods).
replies(2): >>44609925 #>>44609949 #
3. schmidtleonard ◴[18 Jul 25 21:03 UTC] No.44609813[source]▶
Bullshit. Heart disease and cancer (and a long tail of medical problems) cook up with age and kill ~everyone inside ~100 years. If you think that environment and exercise can fix this, show me the person who is 200 years old.

We would have to 100x medical research spending before it was clearly overdone.

replies(2): >>44609899 #>>44611917 #
4. lm28469 ◴[18 Jul 25 21:14 UTC] No.44609899[source]▶
You can 1000x the research if you want, a 50kg overweight person who doesn't exercise, drink alcohol and lives next to a highway is statistically fucked no matter what. You'd need straight up magic to undo the damages

You're not going to fix lifestyle diseases with drugs, and lifestyle diseases are the leading cause of death

replies(1): >>44611905 #
5. lm28469 ◴[18 Jul 25 21:16 UTC] No.44609925[source]▶
So all these things that skyrocketed in the span of 75 years are immutable facts of life, but magic drugs are somehow in the realm of possibilities?

What's easier, educate your people and feed them well to build a strong and healthy nation OR let them rot and shovel billions to pharma corps in the hope of finding a magic cure?

replies(2): >>44609982 #>>44610290 #
6. logicchains ◴[18 Jul 25 21:18 UTC] No.44609949[source]▶
>Drugs to cure the diseases caused by your environment

Humans have so far completely failed to develop any drug with minimal side effects to cure lifestyle diseases; it's magical to think AI can definitely do it.

replies(2): >>44610011 #>>44610213 #
7. astrange ◴[18 Jul 25 21:22 UTC] No.44609982{3}[source]▶
Second one's easier. Technological improvements are always easier than social change.

> shovel billions to pharma corps in the hope of finding a magic cure?

What do you mean finding? We already found it (GLP-1 inhibitors). Ozempic is even owned by a nonprofit (Novo Nordisk). See, everything's fine.

8. astrange ◴[18 Jul 25 21:25 UTC] No.44610011{3}[source]▶
Everything has side effects. In this case we have three pretty good interventions, Ozempic, FMT, and telling people to drink Coke Zero. The worst "side effect" is just that the first two are expensive.

Oh, in this case GP seems to be including sunscreen as a treatment for lifestyle diseases. Pretty sure those don't have side effects, but Americans don't get the good ones.

replies(1): >>44610851 #
9. nerevarthelame ◴[18 Jul 25 21:52 UTC] No.44610213{3}[source]▶
Is your objection just over the word "cure"? Because hypertension, depression, arthritis, asthma are a few in an absurdly long list of lifestyle diseases that use drugs as a primary method of treatment.
10. ribosometronome ◴[18 Jul 25 22:02 UTC] No.44610290{3}[source]▶
>skyrocketed in the span of 75 years are immutable facts of life

A number of them seem to have skyrocketed with quality of life and personal wealth. I suspect my ancestors were skinny not because they were educated on eating well but because they lacked the same access to food we have in modern society, especially super caloric ones. I don't super want to go back to an ice cream scarce world. Things like meat consumption are linked to colon cancer and most folk are unwilling to give that up or practice meat-light diets. People generally like smoking! Education campaigns got that down briefly but it was generally not because people didn't want to smoke, it's because they didn't want cancer. Vaping is clearly popular nowadays. Alcohol, too! The WHO says there is no safe amount of alcohol consumption and attributes lots of cancer to even light drinking. I suspect people would enjoy being able to regularly have a glass of wine or beer and not have it cost them their life.

11. conception ◴[18 Jul 25 22:12 UTC] No.44610345[source]▶
Yes. Let’s ignore 20% of people with cancer. That’s cool.
12. ip26 ◴[18 Jul 25 23:14 UTC] No.44610851{4}[source]▶
including sunscreen as a treatment for lifestyle diseases

HN, where "going outside" is considered a lifestyle.

13. schmidtleonard ◴[19 Jul 25 02:03 UTC] No.44611905{3}[source]▶
Show me the 200 year old person.
14. bdangubic ◴[19 Jul 25 02:05 UTC] No.44611917[source]▶
“inside 100 years” is a veeeeery large span… there is a huge difference if inside 100 is 45 or 95 :)
replies(1): >>44612411 #
15. schmidtleonard ◴[19 Jul 25 03:45 UTC] No.44612411{3}[source]▶
Obviously healthy habits prolong your life. Nobody argued otherwise. My contention is specifically with the idea that they matter to the exclusion of science and pharma. Healthy habits clearly hit a wall: if they didn't, we would have health and fitness gurus living to 200 and beyond by virtue of having a routine that could actually defeat cancer and heart disease. The absence of these 200 year old gurus indicates that no, 80% of cancer (and heart disease, everyone always forgets heart disease) cannot be avoided with diet and exercise. Hence, work on getting through the wall is valuable.