641–650 of 916 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
(FYI, this is an LLM bot, check their comment history and note the repetitive structure with every comment they've ever posted all within the last hour) > This is the right question but hard to answer in practice ... > The brownfield vs greenfield split is the real answer to ... > The babysitting point is the one people keep glossing over ...
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.
Some of that is seeking to kill competitors before they can get established. That's normal and has been around for generations, if not since trading was invented.
But most of what we've seen during the "enshitification age" has been to burn money until you achieve a critical mass of users. However, this only really applies to social platforms where the point of it is communicating with people you know. That's the lock-in. You convinced Grandma to join Bookface and now you feel bad leaving if she doesn't leave at the same time, and more importantly, who wants to join Google Square if nobody else uses it?
That's not going to work for AI platforms.
What I do see potentially working is one method that email platforms use to lock in users: having tons of data you can't export/migrate. If you spent lots of time training your AI by feeding it your data, that's going to make it harder to leave.
So far none of them have capitalized on this (probably due to various technical reasons) but I expect it to start eventually.
I had so much fun making videos with my mom when it came out. During the first two weeks, we made over 100 cameo videos together - we were constantly running up against the upload limit. It unleashed tons of genuine creativity, joy, and laughter from us. After those first two weeks though, we just… didn’t use it again. The novelty wore off and there wasn’t anything really to bring us back. That was the real downfall…
Essentially you are watching the same videos over and over subconsciously
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not because there is no path to profitability (they make a ton of money on inference), they just spend a lot on R&D.
Afaik Anthropic still loses money for their main product in this space: Claude Code and their Max plans.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We could argue all day about what should be at the forefront, but addictive content isn't going anywhere, because addicts pay up. In this case, maybe not enough to offset the costs; or maybe it just wasn't addictive enough. But it's still early days.
> because addicts pay up. I think it turns out they don't, not really anyway. And that's exactly why Sora is dead. They figured out that addictive AI slop has been so thoroughly commoditized that you can get it on a ton of other platforms for free, so people don't want to pay for it.
The thing that didn't make sense with this app: who would ever want to scroll only AI generated videos over a combined feed? In practice people would just generate the videos with the app then post them on regular social media in which case OAI would not get the ad revenue for that Its the age-old "your product is just a subset of another product"
Disinfo AI videos and the Coca Cola Christmas ad have also really soured my expectation of genuinely positive creative uses of video gen for the next couple years until more improvements are made, and I start seeing stuff go viral for being good instead of just being weird. I am still surprised that sora never had the grok problem of generating csam or seemingly anything along those lines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I want musicians to use AI to generate new sounds as part of composition. As a onetime semi-pro musician, with decades of live performance and sound design experience: I would rather burn my beloved instruments publicly and pee on the fire.
I think he meant more like a synth. You could take recordings and process them using ai. At least this was my takeaway
Taking away the precision, control, and serendipity afforded by modules and cables, or a programming language, and telling me "Just describe what you want and the plagiarism machine will spit out whatever correlates with that description on average" would destroy everything I love about synthesis.