631–640 of 916 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> where you can make money and have a really profitable business I am not convinced. Nobody is making money, every player is losing money hand over fist.
Frontier model developers don't make money, but inference providers do. For open weight models there is a healthy market of inference providers that operate profitably without VC backing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I'm autistic and tend to focus on the tech" is not a justification, and I would advise to stop using it as such. Would you apply the same to killing robots? Hey, the Hyperthrasher 2000 mauls people and shreds them to pieces, but it's the most impressive TECH demo I've ever seen!
Totally disagree this is what would happen. Hypertheasher2000 breaks through my door to eat me. First time I’ve seen a man made human eating werewolf bot. Me: damn that’s cool …………AAAAAHHH HELP ME
Doesn't matter if you agree that would happen, the analogy is valid - you're essentially admitting that you're ignoring the negative impacts of the tech for the sake of how impressive it is.
RIP to one of the most evil products I've seen come out of the tech industry in my lifetime.
It's really funny how people can say these things online without giving them a second thought. There are literal weapons being produced that are killing people daily. But no, it's the meme generator that's evil.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is the last narrative that some of Wall Street believes and has enough mediocre or senile coders to promote it. That narrative will implode like Sora later this year.
It's because programmers are willing to pay thousands of dollars a month for a product commensurate with the value to provides, aka AI coding. Generating pointless AI videos for pocket change or ad revenue is a loser in comparison.
However, I don't know a single developer who pays "thousands of dollars a month", not sure how you'd end up like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Personally, I've stopped subscribing to Spotify, YT music, etc because the slop from Suno is good enough to replace mainstream music or whatever lofi playlist. The musician in me just shed a tear
Modern music has done this to itself. When the human product is already pure corporate slop, it's not hard for AI to compete. Hopefully AI outcompeting humans at slop sparks a renaissance of humans creating truly beautiful human artwork. And if it doesn't, then was anything of value truly lost?
I get my modern music from Bandcamp. If you can't find good stuff to listen to, that's a 'you' problem.
> OpenAI launched Sora last September, aiming to expand its dominance among consumers by creating a TikTok-style social feed that allowed users to share AI-generated content with one another. I never understood what this app was about. TikTok (and I would argue most modern social media platforms) isn’t really about sharing things with friends, it’s about entertainment. Most people watch TikToks and YouTube videos bec…
There were ~trends similar to what appeared early in TikTok. For example, early TikTok had the Boss Walk. Sora had no big content trends split into many micro trends in some established ~universe.
Sometimes I think my opinion means nothing on these topics, especially when it's going to get buried in a thread of 500 plus comments. But I think you finally see a little bit of a flaw in the strategy or just a little bit of insight into what was desperation for relevance and to try to very quickly attain what other companies have attained but essentially what they're seeing is this gradual reduction in ambition and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> where you can make money and have a really profitable business I am not convinced. Nobody is making money, every player is losing money hand over fist.
With coding (it's not really coding per se that matters imo it's more like dynamic logic writ large) it's a land grab strategy. They want to get established as the de facto standard and get a whole bunch of people on their platform so by the time they need to "get profitable" they have a captive audience, a leg-up on other labs. It's a tale as old as time, that's why ubers used to be cheaper than cost.
Take Uber as an example: yes they've raised prices to become profitable, but not to the insanely profitable levels they could if they had a true monopoly. People will stay on Uber when the competition is still at a roughly equivalent price, but will switch if Uber raises its prices enough.
Uber Eats is different, since its a 3 sided market where the cost is paid by the restaurant rather than the user.
AI appears it's going to be more like Uber the car service. Claude can charge $200/month, but charging $2000/month seems unlikely to work. I'm sure many would be willing to pay $2000/month if they had no alternative, but there are alternatives.
As someone who generally liked the products that OpenAI puts out, I think Sora was their first product that I really didn't like. I liked GPT primarily because I felt like it respected me: I never felt like it was trying to distract me from my work or get me to waste time doomscrolling. It's primary value proposition to keep me using it wasn't to trick me with addictive content, but to get me high quality answers as…
Not about Sora, but about ChatGPT. I felt the same way for quite a while until I noticed that its response pattern has changed, apparently aiming for higher engagement. Someone aggressively pursued a metric.
At some point, ChatGPT started leaving annoying cliffhangers in its every response, like "Do you want me to share a little-known secret of X that professionals often use?" Like, come on!