Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

70% Positive

Analyzed from 2057 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#money#economy#company#companies#going#saas#real#more#don#economic

Discussion (75 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

overgard27 minutes ago
I'm not usually for arguments of "this money could have been better spent elsewhere", but here's a thought experiment. Lets say instead of injecting $2 trillion and counting into a few AI companies, we instead injected $2 trillion dollars into things like infrastructure (real infrastructure, not GPU warehouses), education, helping out communities ravaged by globalization (I doubt most people on Hacker News venture outside of coastal areas, but if you want to make a REAL difference as an entrepreneur why not look at parts of the country that are struggling and figure out how you could make a difference there? You know, instead of trying to just ruin the economy for the sake of the already-obscenely-wealthy). I'm not saying all those ventures would succeed, but I think that amount of money put towards boring-but-real problems would make a much bigger positive impact for everyone.
dogwalker50002 minutes ago
People invest in what would get them the highest ROI. No one is really thinking about “improving the world”* when they invest.

What’s scary about the AI boom is people over investing and not being able to recoup their investment which will lead to knock on effects - companies going bankrupt and people losing jobs, savings gone, … etc.

* As ESG has shown, not everyone agrees on what is considered “improving”.

christiangenco9 minutes ago
My understanding of injecting money in education is that it's proven to be extremely ineffective at improving outcomes.

Schools just hire more administrators and build nicer gyms.

saulpw1 minute ago
Well yes, you have to spend the money wisely. How could we construct a system so that we have 2x as many teachers (thereby halving the classroom size)? That would have a lot of good second-order effects beyond test scores.
kevin_thibedeau6 minutes ago
You have to wait 20 years for the returns to society. Public education was enormously successful when it was introduced in the 19th century. There's just no profit in waiting for second order effects to kick in.
rayiner3 minutes ago
[delayed]
anonymousiam15 minutes ago
It all sounds great, but unfortunately human nature is that money attracts corruption, so how could a $2T injection be managed in a way that ensures everything is square, without adding significant overhead to the spending?

Governments are often just as bad at this as private entities are.

vlian20889 minutes ago
because that's not how this world works, and neither it should. most people figure that out in their early teens.

and fyi, that 2t is not tax money, it's someone's money.

Johnny_Bonk6 minutes ago
And why’s that?
qsera14 minutes ago
I don't think we don't really know how to do many of these things you list even if we have infinite funds. There is a real chance that we will mess things even more if we have infinite funds...
thot_experimentabout 1 hour ago
Surely this time we'll learn our lesson and disempower the parasites that create these situations, right? Right guys?
thelastgallonabout 1 hour ago
Not this time. This time, we'll bail out them out because they are too big to fail and they need the money and assets. Next time we'll definitely get them. Pinky promise.
JumpCrisscrossabout 1 hour ago
> we'll bail out them out

If it’s after the midterms, I’m doubtful. The AI leaders—apart from Dario—have gone particularly partisan. We also have a lot more post-crisis tooling that lets us wipe equity even when bailing out. See, for example, the ‘23 bank failures.

davidw34 minutes ago
People are already sour on the economy. They are going to be in a whole mood if we get a real, serious recession.
jeffalyanak30 minutes ago
Even if one thinks we need to bail out the _companies_ to prevent more severe economic collapse, we could still arrest plenty of those who were in charge of these organizations.
rubyfanabout 1 hour ago
Next time it’ll be different though
Mistletoeabout 1 hour ago
>"I have a feeling in a few years people are going to be doing what they always do when the economy tanks. They will be blaming immigrants and poor people." -Mark Baum, The Big Short

The scapegoats for this plan never change and have never changed in human history.

Alex_L_Woodabout 1 hour ago
Which parasites?
henry202334 minutes ago
The hoarders.
Gigachad18 minutes ago
Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, etc
ReflectedImage10 minutes ago
Well assuming it's successful, there will be a large number of companies who's value will be reassessed as the token cost to replicate and run the business.

Multi-million dollar companies will be reduced into multi thousand dollar companies.

The CEOs will be replaced with teenagers in garages with their parent's credit cards.

If it stalls, then China will undercut the whole AI market with cheap electricity and crash the US stock market.

So what exactly is the win scenario here?

DennisPabout 2 hours ago
eric_khunabout 1 hour ago
why am i looping back in the captcha when confirming?
wrsabout 1 hour ago
I think that’s what happens if you’re on Cloudflare DNS, due to a nerdy dispute they’re having with archive.is.
AmazingEveryDayabout 2 hours ago
Is there any comprehensive list of historical warnings from central bankers?
ozgrakkurtabout 2 hours ago
I just checked 2007 and 1999 reports [1] a a bit and doesn't seem like they made such obvious warnings at those times.

I don't know much about economy and I just did some ctrl + f skimming, but this new 2026 warning is obviously more clear to me.

[1] https://www.bis.org/annualeconomicreports/index.htm?annualec...

dzink26 minutes ago
We are 81 years away from the end of World War II. The baby boomers born after are the ripest target of financial sharks aiming to get a chunk of their retirements. People will be liquidating to settle estates, to pay inheritance taxes in large numbers. The AI boom feels like a stealthy rug-pull from other assets that are likely to tank from retirement withdrawals and into something that may last a little past the boomer assets wave.
skeledrew36 minutes ago
Well there's also the fact that fundamentally and ultimately, AI is incompatible with the economic system. Capitalism is rooted in human labour having positive economic value, and hence demand. AI will ultimately automate all labour, making the economic value 0. Eventually capital generation will simply die and the system crashes.
cmiles831 minutes ago
There’s no question we’re in a massive AI bubble, the only question is how do we get out of it without wiping out the broader economy.
Gigachad16 minutes ago
It's ether going to be one catastrophic crash or decades of stagnation and decline.
gregjwabout 1 hour ago
same as it ever was
infamouscow29 minutes ago
My guillotine & rope startup is going to make a killing (no pun intended).
usernametaken29about 1 hour ago
Wishful thinking has it that we rally our representatives to let OpenAI and consorts rot. The last thing people should do is bail these delusional people out. Let them have it worse then WeWorks and let’s see if their self crowned AGI can help them out of their misery
Advertisement
0xbadcafebeeabout 1 hour ago
"Claude, how do I become a prepper?"
NDlurker5 minutes ago
Step 1. Get a Costco or Sam's Club membership
forgetfreemanabout 2 hours ago
Pretty much. Given the levels of investment in capital and research if AI companies actually hit what they're aiming at they'd have to collapse the labor market to recoup, bricking the economy in the process. Given the levels of outside investment inflating valuations, if the bubble pops it's 2008 all over again. There's this incredibly narrow window of "just useful enough to extract rents" where everything doesn't go to shit.
senordevnycabout 1 hour ago
Extract rents? I don’t think you’re using the term rent correctly here.
chowellsabout 1 hour ago
No, it's correct. The best (short-term) case is that they become eternal parasites. If they fail to do that, they'll bring a lot down with them when they fall.
gruezabout 1 hour ago
>The best (short-term) case is that they become eternal parasites.

Producing a product that delivers value and people are willing to pay for makes you a "parasite"? Sure, it might cause massive disruptions to the labor market, but that's mostly orthogonal to whether it's a "parasite" or not. Mechanized farming has almost wiped out agricultural employment (compared to pre-industrial levels), but that doesn't make tractor manufacturers or fertilizer companies "parasites"

SilverElfinabout 1 hour ago
Yes now that everyone’s equity is tied to overvalued assets, it’s a problem because it can have economy wide effects like in the subprime mortgage crisis.
mountainriverabout 2 hours ago
Meanwhile AI has gotten so good it can just about one shot a SaaS app.

I’m not worried about it…

samrusabout 2 hours ago
Yeah but the investments arent aiming for churning out SaaS apps. Its to automate large swathes of intellectual labour. Of which only SWE has been cracked yet. There is a question mark as to if the others will crack. If they arent then these investments will collapse from speculation down to reality. That possibility is what is being discussed here

As to whether that will happen, I think that risk is real. Because claude code isnt made by the generalozed capabilities of the tech but by good old non-generalozable hueristics and rule based engines. I dont think that will scale to other feilds at the factor these investments assume. Its the bitter lesson again. It scales with deliberate and specific design, not data, so it wont scale

We learnt this with ibm watson. Deepblue achieved chess supremacy but the last mile wasnt data driven, it was heiristic driven, and so watson, its successor, couldnt scale/generalize.

My prediction is that this speculation on LLMs with harnesses will collapse since they wont scale. We'll have another winter where the reasearchers will be leaft alone long wnough to come up with the next breakthrough (probably game theory based data driven agency) which might then create what this hypecycle is speculating

tonmoyabout 1 hour ago
There’s argument to be made that SWE hasn’t been cracked either. The latest models are great at coding medium sized applications, but figuring out the requirements and consolidation of domain knowledge is something still lacking
byzantinegeneabout 1 hour ago
you mentioned a very good point about scalability. we're seeing alot of productivity gains, but only from SWEs, which are but a very small segment of the global economy. all other economic use cases require thorough last-mile development and iteration that is not too different with current automation tools.
skeledrew18 minutes ago
All those automaton tools will eventually be initially one-shotted and then monitored by LLMs though. There probably won't be a "last mile" per se; just constant tweaking and optimizations throughout, within a feedback loop.
felix-the-cat36 minutes ago
A friend who is a psychologist was telling me he thinks in another year or two insurance companies will insist people see an AI therapist first before being willing to pay for a real person.
whateverboatabout 1 hour ago
We will find out how much of work is given to people just so that there's a person/company associated with a technical decision. I personally think this might be quite high.
byzantinegene26 minutes ago
we already know this, the term bullshit jobs exist for this reason.
overgard36 minutes ago
While I don't agree with your premise at all, even if it could one shot a SaaS product (a statement so vague it's meaningless) I don't think there's much of an argument for why that's economically useful. A lot of SaaS has free software/open source equivalents anyway (how else do you think the clanker's are able to plagiarize it?). People still pay for Office even though you could easily use LibreOffice, or GitHub when you could self host Forgejo. It's like when anthropic made a big deal out of making a broken compiler. Neat, so, after ingesting all of open source and burning a trillion tokens you ended up with something worse than what's already out there; and instead of doing something economically useful like giving a person money to build it or supporting the open source ecosystem, you're just wasting energy on datacenters.
triceratops9 minutes ago
Why even build SaaS apps? AI can just do what a SaaS app can
Grombobulousabout 1 hour ago
So good at it that I’m right now in the process of building instead of buying.

Here’s how that plays out in the economy:

- My company spent $50 on my tokens to build this internal tool

- Anthropic spent $XXX to deliver those tokens to me.

- The company I was going to buy the tool from lost $XX,XXX per year that I would have paid them.

I dunno, kind of sounds like the economy just got smaller.

I could usually accept the idea that software getting cheaper generally increases demand for software and expands the economy surrounding it, but I’m not sure if we have precedent for what happens when software becomes positively worthless.

RRWagnerabout 1 hour ago
And if the company didn't need $XX,XXX*0.90 (or more) that you would have paid them to further develop their product and stay in business? If that other company now paid their own $50 in tokens? Maybe the overall flow of money in the economy went from $XX,XXX (you) + $XX,XXX (them) + $(not much, AI didn't exist yet) equals or is greater to $50 + $50 + ($xbillions in AI)? Dunno.
loegabout 1 hour ago
Are you putting the $XX,XXX-50 under your mattress or investing it in something else productive?
Grombobulousabout 1 hour ago
I certainly can’t give you a better answer for my company than “it depends” or “I don’t really know.”

The company could just be happy to have better margins and be happy the stock finally went up. It might literally do nothing with them or do something economically unproductive like buy back stock.

What I can tell you with certainty is that we aren’t going to hire anyone else or launch any other product as a result. Our business just isn’t at that level of growth potential.

Perhaps we can surmise that money going to shareholders can grow the economy. They’ve got more money to reinvest in other stuff.

But then again, if everyone can shart out a SaaS app with $50 in tokens, what software companies will they want to invest in?

AI gives me that feeling of “what happens to bakers and butchers when the supermarket gets invented and they decide to sell bread and meat at or below cost?”

whall6about 1 hour ago
This is the right question.

Every company has a list of >WACC IRR projects that it can spend saved money on. If not, it’s a cash cow company that wasn’t growing in the first place and will allow shareholders to use the saved cash for other economically expanding projects.

brendoelfrendoabout 1 hour ago
Unless that money is being spent on more tokens, it'll probably be used for stock buybacks.
byzantinegeneabout 2 hours ago
that is not production ready
adamtaylor_13about 2 hours ago
Eh, that's not been my company's experience. Error reports are down. Performance is up clients are happy.

Pretty soon we're going to have to reckon with the fact that AI writes better code than us.

byzantinegeneabout 2 hours ago
so your company runs on a vibe-coded saas app, that sure is a confidence booster for your would-be customers.
coffeefirstabout 1 hour ago
Anything we can see?
epguiabout 2 hours ago
What does that have to do with the article?
georgemcbayabout 2 hours ago
> Meanwhile AI has gotten so good it can just about one shot a SaaS app.

There isn't a direct correlation between AI improvement or stagnation and whether or not the amount being spent by AI labs and the associated ecosystem will result in a financial crash.

Look into the history of railroads and the internet itself to see how massive levels of investment can result in economic crashes even when the thing being invested in produces real, widespread societal value.

One could argue that one of the nightmare economic scenarios for AI is actually that it gets too good too fast and results in a wipeout of the white collar worker that we are currently nowhere near ready to deal with given how propped up our economy is on consumer spending.

kingleopoldabout 1 hour ago
difference this time is they have "fiat money" and money printer. Market and all inv. bankers knows that in major crash they will print unlimited amounts so back to same prices or near them. printer is still printing and it's only goes to selected investments
byzantinegene18 minutes ago
not at current inflation levels, no way to "print" if it means causing inflation to spike beyond unhealthy levels.
lstoddabout 1 hour ago
As if they did not back then. Fiat is just simpler to work with, but one can pull a bubble without it just fine. Anyone forgot the railroad crash of 1873? The tulip mania of 17th century?