←back to thread

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

(paulkedrosky.com)
337 points throw0101c | 2 comments | 18 Jul 25 19:59 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jonas21 ◴[18 Jul 25 21:09 UTC] No.44609857[source]▶
I don't know... 1.2% of GDP just doesn't seem that extreme to me. Certainly nowhere near "eating the economy" level compared to other transformative technologies or programs like:

- Apollo program: 4%

- Railroads: 6% (mentioned by the author)

- Covid stimulus: 27%

- WW2 defense: 40%

replies(18): >>44609903 #>>44609914 #>>44609929 #>>44609942 #>>44609978 #>>44610058 #>>44610176 #>>44610526 #>>44610627 #>>44610705 #>>44610847 #>>44611010 #>>44611147 #>>44611151 #>>44611385 #>>44612266 #>>44612358 #>>44614934 #
raincole ◴[18 Jul 25 21:18 UTC] No.44609942[source]▶
Yeah that's my first reaction to. 1.2% doesn't sound much. It's just people making headlines out of thin air. If it lists the water and energy consumption I might be more concerned.

Slightly off-topic, but ~9% of GDP is generated by "financial services" in the US. Personally I think it's a more alarming data point.

replies(5): >>44610013 #>>44610794 #>>44611558 #>>44611598 #>>44613030 #
1. miki123211 ◴[18 Jul 25 23:08 UTC] No.44610794[source]▶
Ultimately, "financial services" is what's downstream of insurance, banking (deposits / money transfers), loans and retirement savings. Also efficient capital allocation and the provision of government services to some extend. Those are things we want, and we want those things to work well.
replies(1): >>44612479 #
2. fspeech ◴[19 Jul 25 04:01 UTC] No.44612479[source]▶
Yes but it is the overhead. Higher overhead doesn't suggest efficiency.