3 ms·

What's also not added in to the revenue estimates is Jasper and other AI writers that use GPT under the hood.

satvikpendem 3y ago
Given that Jasper and others laid off a bunch of people, I wouldn't necessarily be using those as examples. GPT is simply too good and generalizable that specialized companies that just add prompts aren't worth paying for. https://twitter.com/levelsio/status/1680579916398567426 https://twitter.com/levelsio/status/1680579916398567426
- BoorishBears 3y ago
  Jasper was too early, right on time, and too late all at the same time: - They were "too early" in that what they were squeezing out of GPT-3 was what 3.5/4 could enable from day 1 with ease... - But they were right on time because 3.5/4 would have made differentiating their AI copywriting tool almost impossible, meanwhile GPT-2 was too finicky to scale like they managed to scale GPT-3 did. - And then they were "too late" in that they didn't get enough time to catch up on their massive valuation. 1 year ago their data and machinery around scaling GPT-3 in production alone were a moat: today you can build a synthetic data set for world class copy writing for $100 and fine tune 3.5-turbo on it and build something Jasper quality or better as a weekend project. I think there is room for specialized companies that "just add prompts" as long as the UX is not a literal chatbot. But it's not going to support going from launch to unicorn in 18 months like Jasper did, it'll be much more of a slog.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    I submitted this post from Twitter about how there's no moat in AI startups that's basically confirming what you're saying, I'd recommend giving it a read: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36761643 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36761643
  - cyrillite 3y ago
    Could you expand on this with some wider context, please? I’m not particularly familiar with Jasper, etc.
    - BoorishBears 3y ago
      Jasper.ai (formerly Jarvis) was a YC startup that launched and reached a billion dollar valuation 18 months later. They were using AI to do copywriting/SEO, and most importantly they were doing this before ChatGPT came out. GPT-3 wasn't approachable for lay people, and relatively few people were building on it: So a lot of marketing people were seeing generative AI for the first time through this single tool. And obviously it was earth shattering for them. - The problem is ChatGPT made outputting what Jasper does extremely trivial: I hang around random SEO FB groups and at least once a week someone asks if Jasper is worth it, and a bunch of people chime in saying no ChatGPT output is just as good. ChatGPT is also incredibly easy to use: a grandma could use ChatGPT to write an SEO friendly recipe post. That all leaves Jasper an awkward spot. I don't think they'll die, but to stay competitive they'll need to shed a ton of dead weight. They obviously can't keep all the machinery they built around GPT-3 running if it's no longer adding value, they now have to work 100x harder on positioning, etc.
      - satvikpendem 3y ago
        I honestly don't even know what else Jasper et al could even do to stay relevant.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  But, that is an argument that another AI-Winter is not coming. If a company is confident enough to lay people off, and GPT is that good, then it is not the end of GPT. You are saying "GPT is Simply too good" (which I agree with). But earlier today, entire thread that "AI isn't good enough" Responding to this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37256577#37260717 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37256577#37260717 People, HN, Industry, everyone is all over the place. This is Disruption, another Winter is not coming.

Given that Jasper and others laid off a bunch of people, I wouldn't necessarily be using those as examples. GPT is simply too good and generalizable that specialized companies that just add prompts aren't worth paying for. https://twitter.com/levelsio/status/1680579916398567426 https://twitter.com/levelsio/status/1680579916398567426

BoorishBears 3y ago
Jasper was too early, right on time, and too late all at the same time: - They were "too early" in that what they were squeezing out of GPT-3 was what 3.5/4 could enable from day 1 with ease... - But they were right on time because 3.5/4 would have made differentiating their AI copywriting tool almost impossible, meanwhile GPT-2 was too finicky to scale like they managed to scale GPT-3 did. - And then they were "too late" in that they didn't get enough time to catch up on their massive valuation. 1 year ago their data and machinery around scaling GPT-3 in production alone were a moat: today you can build a synthetic data set for world class copy writing for $100 and fine tune 3.5-turbo on it and build something Jasper quality or better as a weekend project. I think there is room for specialized companies that "just add prompts" as long as the UX is not a literal chatbot. But it's not going to support going from launch to unicorn in 18 months like Jasper did, it'll be much more of a slog.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  I submitted this post from Twitter about how there's no moat in AI startups that's basically confirming what you're saying, I'd recommend giving it a read: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36761643 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36761643
- cyrillite 3y ago
  Could you expand on this with some wider context, please? I’m not particularly familiar with Jasper, etc.
  - BoorishBears 3y ago
    Jasper.ai (formerly Jarvis) was a YC startup that launched and reached a billion dollar valuation 18 months later. They were using AI to do copywriting/SEO, and most importantly they were doing this before ChatGPT came out. GPT-3 wasn't approachable for lay people, and relatively few people were building on it: So a lot of marketing people were seeing generative AI for the first time through this single tool. And obviously it was earth shattering for them. - The problem is ChatGPT made outputting what Jasper does extremely trivial: I hang around random SEO FB groups and at least once a week someone asks if Jasper is worth it, and a bunch of people chime in saying no ChatGPT output is just as good. ChatGPT is also incredibly easy to use: a grandma could use ChatGPT to write an SEO friendly recipe post. That all leaves Jasper an awkward spot. I don't think they'll die, but to stay competitive they'll need to shed a ton of dead weight. They obviously can't keep all the machinery they built around GPT-3 running if it's no longer adding value, they now have to work 100x harder on positioning, etc.
    - satvikpendem 3y ago
      I honestly don't even know what else Jasper et al could even do to stay relevant.
FrustratedMonky 3y ago
But, that is an argument that another AI-Winter is not coming. If a company is confident enough to lay people off, and GPT is that good, then it is not the end of GPT. You are saying "GPT is Simply too good" (which I agree with). But earlier today, entire thread that "AI isn't good enough" Responding to this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37256577#37260717 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37256577#37260717 People, HN, Industry, everyone is all over the place. This is Disruption, another Winter is not coming.