In San Francisco “it is taken as read” that artificial intelligence (AI) “will transform” the world, says The Economist. But for all the hype, the technology has so far had “almost no” discernible impact on business practices or productivity. There are signs of a “backlash” to the AI boom, says Neil Shearing of Capital Economics.
Recent investment analysts’ notes have highlighted “the technology’s shortcomings”. Such a period of disillusionment was inevitable. New technologies always see a lag between introduction and wider economic effects. IT developed in the 1980s and early 1990s didn’t raise US productivity until the late 1990s.
“The boost to productivity from AI will be substantial”, but it could be a few years yet before that feeds through to corporate earnings and GDP. Just as during the “railway mania” of the 1840s, “investors are attempting to capture the benefits of new technologies ahead of them fully materialising in the real economy”.
Subscribe to MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Is AI overrated?
At the peak of 19th-century railway mania, investors were pouring the equivalent of “around 7% of Britain’s national income” into rail projects, says Edward Chancellor on Breakingviews.
As today, there was much grand talk of technology advancing “human civilisation”. Overcapacity and resulting losses were “large and largely foreseeable”. There were, for example, “three separate lines connecting Liverpool with Leeds”. The boom ended with a financial crisis in 1847. Yet the parallel between AI and rail is not perfect. By the 1840s steam locomotives were a fairly mature technology.
By contrast, the “hype over self-teaching computers” appears much more exaggerated. ”Daron Acemoglu of MIT argues that AI buzz 'obscures the reality of what is really a quite limited technology',” says Andrew Orlowski in The Telegraph. By his estimate, “just 4.6% of tasks can be reliably automated”. That makes AI more comparable to an Excel spreadsheet than the harbinger of a “fourth industrial revolution”.
AI uses pattern recognition to guess the right response to a query, but an “intrinsic feature” of such machines is that they confidently “make stuff up” when they can’t find a reliable answer (a problem known as “hallucination”). This renders AI “useless for many potential use cases”. Previous technology bubbles left us with Victorian railways and internet fibre infrastructure.
But today’s tech firms are “spending $1 trillion on data centres” that will soon become outdated as new chips hit the market. “This is capital incineration on a vast scale.” Financial “bubbles can take a long time to burst”, so there is reason to stay invested for now in the beneficiaries of the AI spending splurge: the “chip manufacturers, utilities and other companies exposed to the coming buildout of the power grid”, says Jim Covello of Goldman Sachs.
AI is hardly the first Silicon Valley “tech hype cycle. Virtual reality, the metaverse and blockchain” also attracted huge investments, but still have few real-world applications. Covello thinks that “if important-use cases” for AI “don’t start to become more apparent in the next 12-18 months”, then investors’ enthusiasm “may begin to fade”.
This article was first published in MoneyWeek's magazine. Enjoy exclusive early access to news, opinion and analysis from our team of financial experts with a MoneyWeek subscription.
-
Car tax rules are changing: what are the new vehicle excise duty rates?The rules around vehicle excise duty are changing this April. What are they, and how are they going to affect you?
-
Most affordable cities for single homebuyers revealedBuying a home by yourself? Analysis by Zoopla reveals the most affordable cities in the UK
-
Three companies that dominate their markets with critical productsA professional investor tells us where he’d put his money. This week: Charlie Huggins, manager of Wealth Club’s Quality Shares Portfolio, picks three stocks.
-
Should you continue to hold Smithson Investment Trust?Opinion Smithson Investment Trust, a small- and mid-cap fund, has struggled to live up to lofty expectations, says Rupert Hargreaves.
-
Primark owner Associated British Foods is an overlooked gem going cheap — should you buy shares?Associated British Foods, the owner of Primark, is a family-owned business, which means it is passed over by the increasingly popular passive investment funds. That spells opportunity for private investors, says Jamie Ward.
-
Deepseek's Liang Wenfeng: the maths whizz who shook Big TechFew people had heard of Liang Wenfeng until the launch of his DeepSeek AI chatbot wiped a trillion dollars off US technology stocks. His pivot to AI was of a piece with his past exploits.
-
Trump's tariffs and a shrinking market for alcohol deal double blow to DiageoDonald Trump's tariffs are a further headache for drinks giant Diageo, which is already being buffeted by a decline in alcohol consumption.
-
Three stocks in recruitment companies with promising recovery playsRecruitment agency Robert Walters and its peers are struggling, but now's the time to buy, says Rupert Hargreaves
-
Four UK data companies to buy nowCompanies that create, harness or turn data into a valuable offering could be sitting on a hugely profitable gold mine. Rupert Hargreaves picks four of the best UK data companies to buy now.
-
China's DeepSeek AI is a 'Sputnik moment' for the USThe US is facing a new “Sputnik moment” with the sudden appearance of China's DeepSeek AI firm wiping $1 trillion off the value of US tech stocks.
