Comment by RigelKentaurus

The handwringing tone of the article is off-putting.

Ed is confused between whether AI is useful, and whether the current level of funding and valuations are sustainable. The following statements can both be true:

1. AI is already quite useful and will continue to be so. This is true even if AGI doesn’t happen.

2. The funding and valuations of many AI companies are too far ahead of their skis, and will probably roll back. Some may fail entirely.

About the “where’s the productivity in AI?” question: I think it’s entirely possible that the primary benefit of AI will not be top-line growth but reduced costs (through reduced human labor). Companies will need to reduce prices to prevent losing market share to existing or new competitors, meaning that GDP may not increase, but costs will.