Actually, let me make another comment. The limitations of the first wave of AI that powered the first AI-fever period (1960's) was already well known by the second half of the 1960's (e.g. Dreyfus' critique, which turned to be spot-on). It took another eight years or so for the lack of the expected results to create enough doubt to overwhelm the broadly held convictions that AI would be a success. It might very well be that it is too early to expect enough doubt in society to overwhelm the convictions this time, especially because the failures are mostly hidden from view for most humans and when they are not, they are not strong enough to change convictions because the actual results hack directly into one of our standard (quick & dirty) assessments of intelligence (good language, regardless of good content).
So, I personally expect that an AI-winter this time will not be as quick, nor as devastating as earlier ones, if only because even poor Generative AI creates enough 'cheap' results that it is actually usable. But that's just my estimate, of course.
Actually, let me make another comment. The limitations of the first wave of AI that powered the first AI-fever period (1960's) was already well known by the second half of the 1960's (e.g. Dreyfus' critique, which turned to be spot-on). It took another eight years or so for the lack of the expected results to create enough doubt to overwhelm the broadly held convictions that AI would be a success. It might very well be that it is too early to expect enough doubt in society to overwhelm the convictions this time, especially because the failures are mostly hidden from view for most humans and when they are not, they are not strong enough to change convictions because the actual results hack directly into one of our standard (quick & dirty) assessments of intelligence (good language, regardless of good content).
So, I personally expect that an AI-winter this time will not be as quick, nor as devastating as earlier ones, if only because even poor Generative AI creates enough 'cheap' results that it is actually usable. But that's just my estimate, of course.
Could be. Could be saturation (and not a drop in levels of conviction), maybe?