Do you think that the tech industry is starting to temper its expectations of what GenAI can do?

I for one would be curious to see the evidence presented by the majority of respondents to this survey that there are any intrinsic limits to GenAI. But both options to this survey imply that "hype," and not actual transformation and radical innovation coming at us weekly, is the core phenomenon. 

Hype? We are in the late 1800s and oil was recently discovered at Oil Creek in Pennsylvania. From that perspective, we are still burning raw petroleum in street lamps and haven't yet discovered plastics, jet fuel and all of the new remarkable and futuristic industries of the industrial revolution. GenAI, like oil is general purpose technology. The whole of the 20th century (metaphorically) with all of its wonders and horrors is about to stretch out before us in time.

I don't see limits and was surprised by the phrase. What I see is exponential acceleration toward the recognition of new modalities for intelligence, and a cognitive revolution that will have to reckon with the social, ethical, political and economic consequences of this revolution. Let's talk about that? 

Hype? How do you define hype? Limits? Intrinsic ones, or just a small disappointment that Claude hasn't yet solved the Riemann Hypothesis and remains far (for today) from even being useful for such intractable mathematics? Progress is measured in disappointment, but I don't see that this can be a useful definition of limits.

This assumes that the tech industry had high expectations to start with. Most of the people hyping up Generative AI were the same ones who had been hyping Crypto and BitCoin for the last decade.

They probably sold Tulips in the netherlands at one point too.

Any good tech professional would should have been taking a measured approach to GenAI and seen it for what it is - a tool, that enables a business to work a little bit better. It's not a magic bullet, and it's not an industry disruptor.