Well, people don’t like the “other” analogy - the “iPhone gold rush” basically never ended. https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/7800.jpeg https:/

Well, people don’t like the “other” analogy - the “iPhone gold rush” basically never ended. https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/7800.jpeg https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/7800.jpeg When you invent a whole new class of device, of which you have the best and market-leading implementation, often that class device isn’t going to stop being useful, and if you are good at your job then you often won’t have to relinquish having a large share of the resulting market. There’s really a whole little epistemological bubble that’s forming here, with the people who insist that everyone else must only like it because they think it’s general AI, therefore there must be a collapse coming, because it’s impossible there’s any real value delivered, etc. And the alternative hypothesis is… you’re wrong and there’s something here, and people don’t particularly have blinders on about the potential anymore than you do, they just see the value where you don’t. It’s the same group of people who were butthurt about IP infringement and deepfakes and all the rest who are the most absolutely sure everyone else is an idiot who believes it’s general AI and it’s all a big bubble that’s going to come crashing down. It’s become an article of faith that’s stronger and more real than the fake sentiments it purports to oppose. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/books/28conserv.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/books/28conserv.html?_r=0