You must log in or register to comment.
Fuck Sabrine Hoffsteader. She’s an idiot and you should get your news from someone else. Stupid grifter
Do you have some Information about this?
The facts are:
She has a PhD in theoretical physics. She could not find meaningful employment in particle physics. Unless somebody can correct me, she’s produced little if anything substantive to the field.
In the last several years she has engaged in attacks against the public trust for science. She engages the conspiratorial-minded viewers who’re looking for any reason to disavow scientific knowledge.
One example was putting on scripted theatrics while reading a self-penned letter fraudulently claimed was from a prominent scientist, who’s identity and details of course must be kept totally secret. Reading out this “bombshell letter” was a transparent children’s play, where the held-anonymous writer magically agreed with every one of her endless, bleating refrains, that most scientific research is “bullshit”.
Then her support for Eric Weinstein who is a complete grifting con-man with an “entertainment” publishing that he fraudulently describes as both a “paper” and a credible physical theory. It was literally released on April 1 and directly in it, it tells you it is a work of fiction meant for entertainment, and like all good science (/s) may not be used, incorporated into other works, or improved upon. It’s a complete piece of hogwash, and every credible physicist from here to Mars has described as not fit to wipe fecal matter; not a theory, not even science.
Then there’s all the Theil money.
Check out Professor Dave on YT, he just fucking obliterates her.
Edit
First https://youtu.be/70vYj1KPyT4
Second and better https://youtu.be/nJjPH3TQif0
Third and best, 3.5 hours of clobbering with qualified physicists https://youtu.be/oipI5TQ54tA
I enjoyed Sabine’s analysis in another video that continuing to make increasingly larger models with more compute is about as effective as continuing to make larger and larger particle accelerators. Come on, bro, this million km Gigantic Hadron Collider will finally get us to the TOE. Just one more trillion, bro.
Hasn’t Sabine been getting in some hot water about promoting academic skepticism and making authoritative claims on fields well outside of her expertise?
She has also peddled transphobic talking points
Source video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR_RAp73ra0
And here are some videos categorizing more of her grifts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70vYj1KPyT4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJjPH3TQif0
Wow… i mostly ignore the click-bait stuff she puts out based on the thumbnails alone and tend to follow the “science-oriented” stuff (which has been dwindling but i’ve only followed her for a few months), but watching those 3 PDE videos really shed a light on an underlying pattern.
He makes a good (and logical) point showing that “older” fields of science will have fewer breakthroughs, as is the case of physics.
I like how the interviewees state “not my field of science, here’s my layman interpretation”.
The view-count by type of content is a bit worrying indeed and a telling sign, she could (and should) chose quality over quantity and stick to physics…Indeed the only video that’s somewhat on that note is the first one about transgenders: it’s a “new” phenomenon, people are still getting to terms with it, there are few studies, some of questionable quality, with few individuals… but i didn’t notice anything specifically transphobic about it.
Out of curiosity i went and watched one of her latest videos and she blurts out in the first few minutes A lot of research in the foundations of physics is now pseudo-science. It hasn’t followed the scientific method for decades. Decades?!
I get the churning out papers without real content angle. Anecdotally i’ve had an acquaintance who’s a published astrophysicist complain about how it’s getting harder to get work 'cos academia is shifting from peer review and quality to quantity of published papers as the sole metric. But claiming an entire field has been bullshit for decades…I guess i’ll switch subscriptions.
I work in finance (IT side) if the bubble is gonna burst all the ppl making money off of it haven’t got the memo and I trust their collective intelligence over this woman.
All the people making money off of it are trying to maximize profit, as always.
As soon as they see the downward trend they’ll dump.
Or sink.
I’m actually planning to move my retirement into a money market because of the bubble and stock prices ballooning at a speed that just makes me anxious.
I’m waiting until the new year, though, so as not to miss dividends and because Christmas is coming, and with it, likely elevated spending in the US economy.
But I fully expect it to burst and think it’ll be uglier than 2000.
I agree, but it is nearly impossible for a normal investor to be certain that the current stock price ISN’T the lowest it’ll ever be. The bullshitters have an incentive to keep up the lies a few years longer, just look at the housing bubble, and when it burst, it might burst down to the current level or even higher, if that happens in a couple of years.
I was right once when I sold my ETFs before the Ukraine crisis unfolded, but I realise now that I was stupid-lucky-right. Will never do that again.
Also, I fully expect that some AI usage will withstand a critical review, and will prevail, just like the dot-com.
Then, there is the risk that the unexpected breakthrough DOES come, and the ai-super-senior can fix all the vibe-coded nonsense. I don’t see it in the next 5 years, but both unexpected breakthroughs as well as unexpected plateaus have happened in the past.
It’s true.
No one can time the market. If I opt to move into a money market at the end of the year, I’m likely giving up some short-term gain, but the flip side is that if this bubble does burst then I can buy back those shares at a massive discount, and profit over the long-term on the market recovering.
It’s all a risk. Everyone has to evaluate the info we have and make the best choice according to their risk tolerance.
What really gives me the heebie jeebies are two things:
-The tremendous greed and valuation of so many of these companies, many of which haven’t delivered anything except bold promises. LLM’s can do simple things well, but its output can’t be trusted without human validation, and that’s after training on all of the accumulated knowledge of humankind, which is why I tend to think that this bubble is eventually going to pop in dramatic fashion. I also don’t think we the public have yet seen the extent of the negative effects of using LLM’s, such as the emerging observations of their effect on people’s cognitive abilities and how they’re able to manipulate.
-The absolutely massive gains in the market over the past two years. My own retirement has had legitimate gains over the past two years that are above and beyond what ponzi schemes promise to deliver, and that’s simply unsustainable over the long term, so the question for me becomes when to take the profit and hold for a major event.
Anyway, that’s my reasoning around the choices I plan to make. I am not a financial adviser, so don’t take any of this as suggestions for what to do with your investments. This is just what makes sense to me.
And then AI will just go away and everything will go back to normal again, yes? It’ll suddenly stop working and so people will stop using it for all the things they’re currently using it for.
people will stop using it for all the things they’re currently using it for
They will when AI companies can no longer afford to eat their own costs and start charging users a non-subsidized price. How many people would keep using AI if it cost $1 per query? $5? $20?
OpenAI lost $5 billion last year. Billion, with a B. Even their premium customers lose them money on every query, and eventually the faucet of VC cash propping this whole thing up is gonna run dry when investors inevitably realize that there’s no profitable business model to justify this technology. At that point, AI firms will have no choice but to pass their costs on to the customer, and there’s no way the customer is going to stick around when they realize how expensive this technology actually is in practice.
I run local LLMs and they cost me $0 per query. I don’t plan to charge myself more than that at any point, even if the AI bubble bursts.
Realy? I get what you want to say, but at least the power consumption of the machine you need the model to run on will be yours forever. Depending on your energy price it is not 0 per query.
It’s so near zero it makes no difference. It is not a noticeable factor in my decision on whether to use it or not for any given task.
The training of a brand new model is expensive, but once the model has been created it’s cheap to run. If OpenAI went bankrupt tomorrow and shut down the models it had trained would just be sold off to other companies and they’d run them instead, free from the debt burden that OpenAI accrued from the research and training costs that went into producing them. That’s actually a fairly common pattern for first-movers like that, they spend a lot of money blazing the trail and then other companies follow along afterwards and eat their lunch.
It’s cheap to run for one person. Any service running it isn’t cheap when it has a good number of users.
writes this while sitting in a meeting where the boss is excited about all the fancy AI tool that are being sold to him [send help]
I know the feeling…
