Also, there was a time in HN when people argued before downvoting.
AI is just not at the stage where outfits like the WP should be "pivoting" to it (whatever that means). I suspect it just means producing more "content" with fewer people, and the result will be garbage. Journalism doesn't need more content-filler type articles.
Substitute 'Blockchain' for 'AI' and this is a comment from 2016 or so. Not to say that one can predict the doom of 'AI' on that basis, but lots of VC money being ploughed into a thing does not necessarily mean that the thing will become a Thing.
Whereas Block chain was not part of an average 5th grader's daily computer usage.
Delivering what in what industries? I see SOME usefulness in SOME areas like, specifically, machine vision. But a lot of things? Medical? yeah, no. Lots of issues there. Text generation? Hallucinations out the ass and extremely iffy results often.
Most of the 'wins' in the text gen side still require a TON of work on the human's part to make it usable. People like to mention Pro's in Math and coding talking about it helping them with stuff but they are experts already.
It has potential in a lot of places but this rapid paced forcing of it everywhere is idiotic and foolhardy.
...because clearly the community is unconvinced that AI is actually delivering, and the majority of examples seem to be barely-successful experiments promising improvement at some later point down the road?
Again, we've heard this entire shtick before. Miracle technology gets announced by some egghead teenager, and they write up a Whitepaper that is entirely ignored except for it's "Future Applications" section towards the end. Then the VCs and "thoughtful types" (I use that phrase lightly) harass them into making a business out of it. From then on the playbook is consistently the same; lie. Lie about how many people use your platform, lie about how easy it is to use, lie about how much better it is than the status-quo. They even deny the need to explain themselves when threatened, trying to insist their worth is self-evident and that we're the problem for not understanding their deflective mumbo-jumbo.
Vitalik Buterin, Craig Wright, Sam Bankman-Fried, Sam Altman, they're all re-runs of the same hope-fueled moonshot that invariably ends in a violent fireball. Yes, you have to go the extra mile when convincing people that you have a logically-held position instead of a lie you are telling to inflate asset prices.
AI alone has had many and this is just another one of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_winter
Just because we have made progress since the last one doesn't mean that _this_ time it will be magically different.
So what makes you think this will be any different?
Keep in mind that each hype cycle was started by a leap in progress, so you can't say this time it is different because we made a big leap in progress.