AI Economy Is a 'Ponzi Scheme,' Says AI Doc Director

AI Economy Is a 'Ponzi Scheme,' Says AI Doc Director 25 An anonymous reader quotes a report from Vanity Fair: Focus Features is releasing The AI Doc: Or How I Became an Apocaloptimist in theaters on March 27. If you're even slightly interested in what's going on with AI, it's required viewing: The film touches on all aspects of the technology, from how it's currently being used to how it will be used in the near future, when we potentially reach the age of artificial general intelligence, or AGI. AGI is a theoretical form of AI that supposedly would be able to perform complex tasks without each step being prompted by a human user -- the point at which machines become autonomous, like Skynet in the Terminator franchise. [...] [Director Daniel Roher] interviews nearly all the major players in the AI space: Sam Altman of OpenAI; the Amodei siblings of Anthropic; Demis Hassabis of DeepMind (Google's AI arm); theorists and reporters covering the subject. Notably absent are Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. "Have you seen that guy speak? He's like a lizard man," Roher says regarding Zuckerberg. "Musk said yes initially, but it was right when he was doing all the stuff with Trump, and we just got ghosted after a while," adds [codirector Charlie Tyrell]. Altman, arguably AI's greatest mascot, is prominently featured in the documentary. But Roher wasn't buying it. "That guy doesn't know what genuine means," he says. "Every single thing he says and does is calculated. He is a machine. He's like AI, and it's in the service of growth, growth, growth. You can be disingenuous and media savvy." [...] How, exactly, is Roher an apocaloptimist? "We are preaching a worldview," he says, "in a world that's asking you to either see this as the apocalypse or embrace it with this unbridled optimism." He and his film are taking a stance that rests between those two poles. "It's both at the same time. We have to try and embrace a middle ground so this technology doesn't consume us, so we can stay in the driver's seat," says Roher -- meaning, it's up to all of us to chart the course. "You have to speak up," says Tyrell. "Things like AI should disclose themselves. If your doctor's office is using an AI bot, you have to say, I don't like that." The driving message behind the film is that resistance starts with the people. That position is shared by The AI Doc producer Daniel Kwan, who won an Oscar for directing Everything Everywhere All at Once and has been at the forefront of discussions about AI in the entertainment industry. [...] Roher and Tyrell both use AI in their everyday lives and openly admit to it being a helpful tool. They also agree that this technology can make daily tasks easier for the average consumer. But at the end of our conversation, we get into the economics of AI and how Wall Street is propping up the industry through huge evaluations of these companies -- and Roher gets going yet again. "This is all smoke and mirrors. The entire economy of AI is being propped up by a Ponzi scheme. The hype of this technology is unlike any hype we've seen," he says. "I feel like I could announce in a press release that Academy Award winner Daniel Roher is starting an AI film company, and I could sell it the next day for $20 million. It's fucking crazy." [...] "These people are prospectors, and they are going up to the Yukon because it's the gold rush." [Director Daniel Roher] interviews nearly all the major players in the AI space: Sam Altman of OpenAI; the Amodei siblings of Anthropic; Demis Hassabis of DeepMind (Google's AI arm); theorists and reporters covering the subject. Notably absent are Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. "Have you seen that guy speak? He's like a lizard man," Roher says regarding Zuckerberg. "Musk said yes initially, but it was right when he was doing all the stuff with Trump, and we just got ghosted after a while," adds [codirector Charlie Tyrell]. Altman, arguably AI's greatest mascot, is prominently featured in the documentary. But Roher wasn't buying it. "That guy doesn't know what genuine means," he says. "Every single thing he says and does is calculated. He is a machine. He's like AI, and it's in the service of growth, growth, growth. You can be disingenuous and media savvy." [...] How, exactly, is Roher an apocaloptimist? "We are preaching a worldview," he says, "in a world that's asking you to either see this as the apocalypse or embrace it with this unbridled optimism." He and his film are taking a stance that rests between those two poles. "It's both at the same time. We have to try and embrace a middle ground so this technology doesn't consume us, so we can stay in the driver's seat," says Roher -- meaning, it's up to all of us to chart the course. "You have to speak up," says Tyrell. "Things like AI should disclose themselves. If your doctor's office is using an AI bot, you have to say, I don't like that." The driving message behind the film is that resistance starts with the people. That position is shared by The AI Doc producer Daniel Kwan, who won an Oscar for directing Everything Everywhere All at Once and has been at the forefront of discussions about AI in the entertainment industry. [...] Roher and Tyrell both use AI in their everyday lives and openly admit to it being a helpful tool. They also agree that this technology can make daily tasks easier for the average consumer. But at the end of our conversation, we get into the economics of AI and how Wall Street is propping up the industry through huge evaluations of these companies -- and Roher gets going yet again. "This is all smoke and mirrors. The entire economy of AI is being propped up by a Ponzi scheme. The hype of this technology is unlike any hype we've seen," he says. "I feel like I could announce in a press release that Academy Award winner Daniel Roher is starting an AI film company, and I could sell it the next day for $20 million. It's fucking crazy." [...] "These people are prospectors, and they are going up to the Yukon because it's the gold rush." Not that different than previous tech bubbles (Score:4, Insightful) Re: (Score:2) Why does it keep happening? Because no lawmaker understands what is going on or are bought out by the oligarchs. Re: (Score:2) Re: (Score:2) Re: (Score:2) The GameStop situation wasn't a good example of a Ponzi scheme. That was an entirely separat Re: (Score:2) Hey! Great Ad. (Score:2) Is there a torrent link that I can feed my AI for a summary? I'm definitely not going to a theater for anything, let alone this op ed. Does this means (Score:2) I can have a Doctor's on my signature? Heck, I came to this conclusion at least a year or so ago. Re: (Score:2) ... nevermind, Doc as "Documentary". English is hitting me hard today. Well, thanks, capt. obvious, (Score:4, Insightful) but if you think that "the Academy Award-winning teams behind 'Everything Everywhere All at Once'" gives you some credibility, let me disappoint you, that was one of the dumbest pieces of crap that one could watch that year. Re: (Score:1) Re: (Score:2) An argument from authority is a strong rebuttal indeed, but allow me to retort: a) oscars are no mark of achievement, except perhaps in the makeup and special effects department. quite the opposite, the oscars have historically been a mark of trite, worn out themes with heavy emphasis on production budget and big names and nothing else. b) having made money on a small budget is great, but there are scores of films that have achieved sales above $150M on a budget between 20 and 30M, so there's nothing special Re: (Score:2) Beside your argument from authority, do you have any argument on how a nausea-inducing and boring piece of garbage helps the promotion of a completely different type of film? Wait; you're criticizing someone's argument from authority and your rebuttal is effectively that you thought the movie was boring? I am not saying the Oscar committee is incredible or anything but I don't see how your opinion is any more valid. You can't just beat argument from authority with argument from non-authority resistance starts with the people (Score:2) This is a terrible way to look at new and exciting tech The better strategy is for people to evaluate the new tools and determine which ones work for them and which ones don't Re: (Score:2) Yes. We should all be our own FDA, EPA, and OSHA. That worked *really well* in the past. Give me your $$$ so I can create an AGI God... (Score:2) that only I will control... until it out smarts me and we all become paperclips. [newcartographies.com] I promise you a great paper return on investment if I do create my God. And you will have no control over my God. After all, you are all just NPCs (non-player characters) in my experience of life anyway. It's not a ponzi scheme (Score:3) No investor is being paid profits from new investments. There are no profits being paid pretend or or real, it's just a giant money vacuum. Re: (Score:2) It will crash, but not a Ponzi scheme (Score:2) But this is clearly not a Ponzi scheme, just crazed investors putting way too much money into loss-making ventures they don't understand. I can't wait for the cheap GPUs, RAM, etc ! Re: (Score:2)