With the final 32 teams for the World Cup confirmed and the excitement on the pitch still palpable, another ‘cyber farce’ has eagerly emerged—a company has launched a ‘prediction results announcement’ featuring 12 major AI models.

In recent days, the PR and tech spheres have been a spectacle to behold:

Those who made correct predictions are reveling in a deluge of press releases, eager to proclaim to the world that they’ve ‘cracked the code of football,’ as if their algorithms had suddenly eclipsed human intelligence overnight.

Those who got it wrong have gone silent, playing dead or pretending ignorance, as if their high-stakes gamble was nothing more than a collective daydream.

Looking at the screen filled with reports of ‘miraculous predictions,’ I can’t help but wonder: When did China’s tech community stoop so low as to rely on guessing football outcomes to prove its worth?

This is truly a unique ‘cyber spectacle’ in China’s tech landscape.

The beauty of football lies in defying so-called ‘certainty’

Some tech giants, perhaps too accustomed to ‘solving problems through repetition,’ seem to believe that everything in the world can be formatted.

Football, however, is precisely the sport that China’s sports industry has struggled with for decades without finding a solution.

Why?

Because the essence of this sport isn’t about ‘might makes right’ through repetitive training, pattern recognition, and data accumulation. Instead, it’s a complex interplay of physicality, tactics, psychology, referee decisions, pitch conditions, and even whether a player’s breakfast agreed with them that day.

The beauty of football lies in its defiance of ‘certainty’ itself.

Upsets, comebacks, last-minute goals—it shatters the very idea of ‘finding patterns.’

Any attempt to use large models to crack this uncertainty is essentially no different from placing bets in a casino.

No matter how many layers of Transformer architecture you stack or how many petaflops of computing power you deploy, the result is nothing more than a guess—left or right.

Is winning a hundred consecutive bets in a casino really something to celebrate in corporate earnings reports? Is it worth trumpeting as a ‘technological breakthrough’ to the public, boasting about your methodology?

Using probabilistic coincidence to polish your AI technology isn’t just ignorance—it’s deceit.

While others are tackling hard tech, we’re setting up street-side fortune-telling stalls

Even more laughable is how these tech giants and unicorns, who constantly preach about ‘empowering industries’ and the ‘fourth industrial revolution,’ turn around and dedicate their most precious computing resources and top scientists to ‘cyber fortune-telling.’

China’s AI industry is at a critical juncture, transitioning from ‘paper-pushing’ to ‘hardcore implementation.’

Faced with the global AI wave, what do we lack most right now?

We lack breakthroughs in domestic GPU ecosystems, compliant construction of high-quality Chinese language corpora, and the confidence to solve real-world problems in manufacturing, healthcare, and agriculture, one step at a time.

Look at the global tech frontier: When have you ever seen Germans use AI to predict Bundesliga scores to showcase Industry 4.0?

Or Americans use large models to bet on the Super Bowl to flaunt Silicon Valley innovation?

Only in China do we reduce cutting-edge technology to street-side fortune-telling.

Not only does this fail to showcase world-changing disruptive products, but it also exposes the speculative, impulsive, and insecure nature of certain enterprises.

The dignity of science and technology cannot withstand collective self-delusion

If we’re going to expend computing power, wouldn’t it be better to use these resources to optimize AI-assisted college entrance exam volunteer application guidance—at least that would genuinely help students avoid detours and create social value?

Even predicting typhoon paths or simulating supply chain fluctuations would be more dignified than wasting electricity on football betting.

Our ‘national treasures of future technology’ are being packaged into electronic Paul the Octopuses and gold-plated fortune-telling compasses.

Guess right, and you proclaim yourself a ‘miraculous predictor’ to harvest traffic; guess wrong, and you act as if nothing happened—this isn’t tech exploration; it’s a group séance.

So, tech giants, stop it already. Cut it out.

The dignity of science and technology cannot withstand this kind of collective self-delusion.

If an AI large model has to rely on guessing football outcomes to prove its ‘usefulness’ with billions of parameters, it only shows: AI isn’t useless—you are.

Stop insulting AI already.

Pfft!