top | item 41561252

(no title)

memothon | 1 year ago

I always find it really strange when articles like this claim nobody is paying for generative AI. I can't find reliable stats on this but there are at least a million ChatGPT Plus subscribers. Does that not count?

It takes time for new advancements to get proliferated through the economy.

discuss

order

samizdis|1 year ago

Yes, those subscribers do count, but the author writes of sustainability doubts in that respect, arguing that current hype and FOMO-style thinking may well fizzle out:

>I believe that a lot of businesses are "trying" AI at the moment, and once those trials end (Gartner predicts that 30% of generative AI projects will be abandoned after their proof of concepts by end of 2025), they'll likely stop paying for the extra features, or stop integrating generative AI into their companies' products.

memothon|1 year ago

I don't disagree it is unsustainable, I'm really trying to be more precise about whether anyone is getting value out of the tools. I'm just really skeptical that nobody is getting value.

tabtab|1 year ago

Objective info is currently hard to come by, but my horse sense is that Big AI is subsidizing it for many projects, including those in other companies, to gain both market share and investor excitement (deserved or not).

If one looks at most the bubbles of the past, the writing is on the wall. AI won't go away, but will probably take longer to make profitable than anticipated, just like dot-coms and smart-speakers. Force feeding it is causing indigestion, and it's likely to PukeGPT.

JumpCrisscross|1 year ago

> find it really strange when articles like this claim nobody is paying for generative AI

Where was this claimed? The author quotes OpenAI’s multi-billion dollar revenues.

memothon|1 year ago

Sorry I should have been more specific.

The article does mention that OpenAI has huge revenue.

> While The Information reported that OpenAI's revenue is $3.5 to $4.5 billion a year in July, The New York Times reported last week that OpenAI's annual revenues have "now topped $2 billion," which would mean that the end-of-year numbers will likely trend toward the lower end of the estimate.

But then the author claims that the business value is questionable.

> And even if they did, it isn't clear whether generative AI actually provides much business value at all. The Information reported last week that customers of Microsoft's 365 suite [snip]

I would have appreciated a deeper discussion of why OpenAI's revenue isn't a data point toward generative AI having some business value. Presumably if nobody was using generative AI in a way that gives them value, OpenAI wouldn't be using all those GPU hours. That's what I was missing from the article personally.

__loam|1 year ago

It counts if the unit economics are positive. Right now the only people who know if it is are at OpenAI.