I wouldn't characterize it as "betting against AI" at all, but there are tons of tech companies (perhaps a majority? I don't know, but it's a least a very large percentage) who aren't investing anything significant into genAI at this point. It's more "waiting and seeing" than "betting against".

Wouldn't that just be any company who isn't doing a lot with AI?

The catch here is that even at the companies who claim they're doing a lot with AI, they're short on details and it's not clear if they're really dependent on AI or doing anything at all...

There's a lot of what sounds like LinkedIn resume fodder "person X says they accomplished Y at their company with AI" and it's not clear if they actually did anything or if it has anything to do with AI.

numerous tech laggards that have no ability or talent to invest in the future

also, the legions of mid-to-senior tech workers clinging to waterfall development and the easy money it brings

no different than the companies and workers that tried to fight the web, or ecommerce, or mobile, or any other paradigm shift

HN is also part of this...every discussion of AI instantly devolves into pessimism, snark, cynicism...these are the same folks who declared FSD was "impossible" (despite Waymo booking revenue in multiple cities with FSD now)

Betting against? No.

Going all-in? Also no.

What I've seen across several companies is they're familiarizing themselves with the technology and understanding how they may utilize it to enhance workflows, augment the productivity of existing staff, and even replace some staff.

It's wise for companies to start doing this assessment because the technology is poised to improve dramatically over the next 5-10 years and if you wait until then to start your analysis then it'll be too late: your competitors will be passing you by. You want to establish an AI impact analysis practice now because you're going to be turning the crank on that handle a few times over the next few years.