Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Neela 🌶️'s avatar

For all the chest-puffing from tech bros about taking over the world and everyone’s jobs, there’s just no there there.

There are two issues - incentive structure (money) and the need for good data.

Investors want returns in 7-10 years. A productivity tool can generate revenue in 12-18 months. Cancer research takes 15-25 years before you see a dollar. Most AI startups are trying to hit growth metrics for their next funding round. There is no other goal.

Besides... AI needs massive amounts of high-quality data. Protein folding worked because they had data already mapped out from decades of lab work. With cancer, data is limited and protected.

Apps are, as they say, "low-hanging fruit." UGH!

They have billions of emails, support tickets, and code samples to train on.

Not justifying any of it, but just stuff that is discussed in meetings :)

Happy Friday, Andrew....

Andrew Sniderman 🕷️'s avatar

Hey Neela :) You know 99% of those AI apps will be toast in a year if not a month at the rate the frontier labs are pushing features. Big biz tech has always been about productivity and AI is just a step function there — nothing groundbreaking.

But science! Science runs on data. Sure there are gatekeepers but Google has so much money in the bank they can afford to be philanthropic, hence Alphafold and more.

So I am optimistic https://thenextweb.com/news/anthropic-just-paid-400-million-for-a-startup-with-fewer-than-10-people

My girlfriend in college had a research job where she killed lab mice (broke their necks with a pair of scissors) and sliced their brains up like lunch meat for an army of PhDs to analyze the slides and categorize the data. My daughter had a research job where she would hold autistic kids hands at 2AM as they scanned their brains in an MRI to try to pattern match. Huge data pipeline where back then pattern matching was only loosely automated

The data is there.

Thanks for reading; love hearing from you!

No posts

Ready for more?