I wonder if some people don’t understand that saying anymore. “Get that bag” means getting a full money bag. “Left with the bag” or “left holding the bag” means you have an empty money bag that has been emptied by others.
Your interpretation, to be left with an empty bag that previously had something valuable, is one of several interpretations, but not the earliest.
The original seems to be, the member of the group holding a bag of contraband when the authorities intervene.
I think this second meaning is the more compelling: the group sought a benefit but only one bears the cost. Or, each member of the group took the risk but that risk only materialised for one member.
I mean, after you share out a bag of gold, including giving yourself a share, the bag will be empty.
No, I know what it means. I don’t think it applies here. It would apply to something like a pump and dump scheme, where the people know the bag is already empty, but they fluff it up and try to pass it off on someone else before the whole thing collapses.
That’s not what these companies are doing. They legitimately believe that AI will eventually become profitable and are trying to corner the market and be the dominant player. They WANT the crash. They just want to be the ones that survive it. That’s not the same as trying to leave someone else with the bag at the end of it.
I don’t think that’s really the same. Not being left with the bag means you know already know the bag is empty and pass it on to someone else before they realize it’s empty. Like a pump and dump scheme.
That’s not what these companies are doing. They’re not trying to leave investors holding the empty bag. They are legitimately trying to turn profitable and corner the market.
The fibre in the ground from the dotcom bubble was still used… eventually.
Most of the 100’s of billions of dollars of GPUs that have just been sitting on shelves in warehouses and will continue to sit there for years even if there isn’t a crash will be nearly worthless (relative to the prices paid) whether they try to mass liquidate at a small fraction of the purchase price to pay back some of their 10%+ interest loans they used to buy them or they sit around for a decade until there’s a place to put them and at that point they could be so inefficient, they’re not worth the money to install them and power to run them.
That’s if they don’t decide the best course of action is to launch them into LEO lol. If they do (they will–they’re that stupid), the infrastructure will burn up in less than five years.
The LOE stuff is the dumbest shit possible I’ve ever heard for data centers I swear to God. Who the hell comes up with these ideas 😭 space is such a difficult environment to work in, absolutely not suited for data centers. You barely get any benefit out of it at all, just somewhat more efficient solar panels that could have been worked around by having more down on earth
There’s a pretty big benefit to the solar panels: more efficient and also can be placed in a solar-synchronous orbit that is always illuminated. I can’t imagine that power advantage outweighs the disadvantages of cooling power-hungry hardware with no way to reject that heat to air or water. I’m with you: WTF are they thinking?
I heard Google just launched a test bed. Basically one mini server the size of a refrigerator that can only operate for 15 minutes before it needs to shut off to prevent heat damage. I’m guessing that thing will prove the case against celestial data centers, but we’ll see. The only good thing to come of this is that it might help advance cooling tech for satellites and suchlike.
Yeah, chips are more of a perishable good than any kind of durable infrastructure, and at the end of the day, the models themselves have no durable value because information is never truly scarce, regardless of how they try to make us pretend it is or poison the well with lies. There’s no magic solution to making LLMs actual AGI or even effective tools outside of their narrow scope. Not only that, the way they’re using it is extremely reckless, deeply inefficient, and supremely cost intensive, on a level that makes the Manhattan Project look wholesome. There isn’t going to be a “last man standing” to win, it’s just going to go up like flash powder and take everyone in the dogpile with it.
Just so we are clear the dot com crash was a result of over commercialization and venture capitalization of the World Wide Web (hence “dot com” crash and not Newsgroup crash). The Internet was nearly 30 years old at that point. What became AOL went online in 1985, 8 years before commercial interests were allowed on the WWW, just as one for instance.
I didn’t say AI is going to go away. I said there are many unscrupulous investors that are trying to game the system to take money from suckers knowing full well there is a crash coming and planning to pull out at the top.
A lot of them do know and are planning to be the ones not left with the bag
Eh kind of. AI is not going to go away. It’s going to be just like the internet in the early days. With a similar crash to the dot-com crash.
They’re just all trying to be the one that doesn’t go bankrupt during the crash.
trying to be the one that doesn’t go bankrupt during the crash == planning to be the ones not left with the bag
I wonder if some people don’t understand that saying anymore. “Get that bag” means getting a full money bag. “Left with the bag” or “left holding the bag” means you have an empty money bag that has been emptied by others.
There’s a full discussion of the phrase here
Your interpretation, to be left with an empty bag that previously had something valuable, is one of several interpretations, but not the earliest.
The original seems to be, the member of the group holding a bag of contraband when the authorities intervene.
I think this second meaning is the more compelling: the group sought a benefit but only one bears the cost. Or, each member of the group took the risk but that risk only materialised for one member.
I mean, after you share out a bag of gold, including giving yourself a share, the bag will be empty.
Oh wow! I had no idea. I think of it in money schemes. Thanks !
No, I know what it means. I don’t think it applies here. It would apply to something like a pump and dump scheme, where the people know the bag is already empty, but they fluff it up and try to pass it off on someone else before the whole thing collapses.
That’s not what these companies are doing. They legitimately believe that AI will eventually become profitable and are trying to corner the market and be the dominant player. They WANT the crash. They just want to be the ones that survive it. That’s not the same as trying to leave someone else with the bag at the end of it.
I thought “get that bag” was specifically to encourage women chasing money to buy synecdochic luxury purses.
I don’t think that’s really the same. Not being left with the bag means you know already know the bag is empty and pass it on to someone else before they realize it’s empty. Like a pump and dump scheme.
That’s not what these companies are doing. They’re not trying to leave investors holding the empty bag. They are legitimately trying to turn profitable and corner the market.
The fibre in the ground from the dotcom bubble was still used… eventually.
Most of the 100’s of billions of dollars of GPUs that have just been sitting on shelves in warehouses and will continue to sit there for years even if there isn’t a crash will be nearly worthless (relative to the prices paid) whether they try to mass liquidate at a small fraction of the purchase price to pay back some of their 10%+ interest loans they used to buy them or they sit around for a decade until there’s a place to put them and at that point they could be so inefficient, they’re not worth the money to install them and power to run them.
That’s if they don’t decide the best course of action is to launch them into LEO lol. If they do (they will–they’re that stupid), the infrastructure will burn up in less than five years.
The LOE stuff is the dumbest shit possible I’ve ever heard for data centers I swear to God. Who the hell comes up with these ideas 😭 space is such a difficult environment to work in, absolutely not suited for data centers. You barely get any benefit out of it at all, just somewhat more efficient solar panels that could have been worked around by having more down on earth
There’s a pretty big benefit to the solar panels: more efficient and also can be placed in a solar-synchronous orbit that is always illuminated. I can’t imagine that power advantage outweighs the disadvantages of cooling power-hungry hardware with no way to reject that heat to air or water. I’m with you: WTF are they thinking?
I heard Google just launched a test bed. Basically one mini server the size of a refrigerator that can only operate for 15 minutes before it needs to shut off to prevent heat damage. I’m guessing that thing will prove the case against celestial data centers, but we’ll see. The only good thing to come of this is that it might help advance cooling tech for satellites and suchlike.
Yeah, chips are more of a perishable good than any kind of durable infrastructure, and at the end of the day, the models themselves have no durable value because information is never truly scarce, regardless of how they try to make us pretend it is or poison the well with lies. There’s no magic solution to making LLMs actual AGI or even effective tools outside of their narrow scope. Not only that, the way they’re using it is extremely reckless, deeply inefficient, and supremely cost intensive, on a level that makes the Manhattan Project look wholesome. There isn’t going to be a “last man standing” to win, it’s just going to go up like flash powder and take everyone in the dogpile with it.
Just so we are clear the dot com crash was a result of over commercialization and venture capitalization of the World Wide Web (hence “dot com” crash and not Newsgroup crash). The Internet was nearly 30 years old at that point. What became AOL went online in 1985, 8 years before commercial interests were allowed on the WWW, just as one for instance.
I think a more concise explanation is that everyone knows that shares are over-valued, but no one really knows by how much.
I didn’t say AI is going to go away. I said there are many unscrupulous investors that are trying to game the system to take money from suckers knowing full well there is a crash coming and planning to pull out at the top.
Thats why they are pumping these IPO valuations