by Dan Burns

Aug 8, 2025, 9:30 AM

What will happen when AI doesn’t deliver?

I saw this:

One of the biggest concerns when it comes to AI is regarding spending. Even though Silicon Valley is pouring in countless dollars—over $300 billion this year alone, according to numbers from the Financial Times—not everyone believes demand for AI will scale up accordingly. And if it does not, it would cause a major problem for the industry.

In a paper published earlier last month, the Federal Reserve claimed the biggest challenge with generative AI was not the potential of the tech itself but rather getting people and businesses to actually use it. The technology isn’t necessarily adopted widely outside of tech, science, and finance fields, and is deployed mostly by large firms…

As the technology gets better, demand for AI is bound to increase, too, but by just how much is a mystery. If that demand does not grow as expected, the Fed paper warns, it could have “disastrous consequences,” much like the railroad overexpansion of the 1800s and the economic depression that followed.
(Gizmodo)

And this:

AI in agriculture, sustainable fuel and crop insurance are just a few of the topics that’ll be discussed during Farmfest Forums starting on (August 5)…

There are several forums ranging from artificial intelligence and agriculture to the recently passed reconciliation bill and more. Kent Thiesse, coordinator for Farmfest Forums, said there’s a good mix of topics that are relevant in the agriculture industry right now.

“Who would’ve thought we’d be talking about artificial intelligence as it related to agriculture 20 years ago?” Thiesse said. “But, here we are.
(MPR)

If Big Tech thinks ornery old farmers are about to let AI run their combines, they’ve got another thing coming. And I don’t see how it’s going to get them better prices for their crops, given the massive overproduction, driven by Big Ag, that’s almost certain to continue and even worsen. In fact, and whatever the giddy tech fangirls and fanboys are always trying to claim, I strongly suspect that people in a lot of jobs will take considerable offense at the notion that they need artificial “intelligence” in order to “improve” on what they’ve been doing for most of their adult lives.

And then you see all the AI’s out there, each claiming to be the supreme achievement. Just to name some of the prominent ones, ChatGPT, OpenAI, Grok, all the crap Google is throwing out there, etc., etc. And then there’s Meta expecting people to use AI “friends” in order to cure the “loneliness epidemic.” If people want to try that that’s their business, but I don’t see it having widespread appeal. In fact I think it will work as claimed about as well as Facebook has to bring people from all over the globe together and create lasting world peace and harmony. On the whole, and as with TV streaming – which was also going to conquer the world – AI will continue to come up against issues with a) excessive choices, and b) none of said choices being all that great to say the least.

I will reiterate that if AI really turns out to mean that everyone who wants to – a large majority, to be sure – gets to work less and retire sooner I’ll happily admit that I was dead wrong and will become a giddy fanboy myself. But that doesn’t seem to be the intent, much less the reality, at this time.

Comment from Mac Hall: What will happen when AI provides drought guidance (and it’s wrong) (or it’s correct) … will farmers accept it? Will the guidance be timely (or too late for anything to be done)?

What will happen with MGT’s concern that America needs federal legislation to ban weather modification and geoengineering (HR4403)?

How will this impact Brad Finstad and his Frontier Labs business which is involved in soil testing?

BTW … interesting article suggesting that AI is already making headway