5 ms·

It's the same pipe dream as "AI content creators will take over youtube". There is no "formula" for success in the creator economy - the winners are largely ra

It's the same pipe dream as "AI content creators will take over youtube". There is no "formula" for success in the creator economy - the winners are largely random. A better way to look at it is there are 4 million humans out there trying every permutation to crack success, and ~400k actually do it. Unless you have a sufficiently advanced AI agent that is both varying it's content and it's marketing strategy to the tune of maybe ~1000 different iterations it's unlikely we will see a version of OnlyFans that exists that is majority AI generated. The "parasocial ai girlfriend" sounds like a flawed premise aswell. OF girls are not therapists - Cardi B, Bhad Bhabie, and others aren't raking in millions because they are good girlfriends (although that is part of the upsell). Social status plays a part in the most successful girls, people seem to subscribe because the creator is popular, especially if she's already built a platform elsewhere. In short, social status does not have an AI substitute.

ghaff 2y ago
From another angle, a bunch of us in the tech sector made pretty nice salaries. Very few of us were really all-stars in the sense that everyone knew who we we were on YouTube, etc. Which was fine.
kiba 2y ago
A good AI girlfriend wouldn't be a therapist but would mimics every aspect of a girlfriend, including arguments and fights and makeups, because that's how bonding occurs. That's going to be how successful AI girlfriend will be made.
- l0ng1nu5 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - ZoomZoomZoom 2y ago
    Why? They're common people, not sociopaths.
    - Loughla 2y ago
      I think maybe it's my own personal bias, but it does feel like anyone who pays money for an AI girlfriend really won't want it to disagree with them. I believe they'll want an idyllic and fantasy version of a relationship.
      - dwattttt 2y ago
        I dunno how sustainable that scenario is, because it brings to mind the maybe apocryphal Chinese curse "may you be granted everything you wish for".
      - fsckboy 2y ago
        you are saying that the ai gf will not be like a real human female, but you are not making any argument that there is a defect in the bf's attachment to the gf.
      - SoftTalker 2y ago
        Agree. The only advantage of an AI girlfriend is that you can shut her off when you're finished with her.
      - atmavatar 2y ago
        While I grant that some and perhaps even most people won't want the AI girlfriend to disagree, there are some out there who treat arguments as a necessary and desirable spice in a relationship. That said, I can't really think of anything that would be worth arguing with an AI over.
      - kiba 2y ago
        AI girlfriend that always agree with you and never contradict anything you say isn't going to be as addicting as an AI girlfriend who on occasion disagree with you.
    - stonogo 2y ago
      I'd say the set of people who want an AI girlfriend and the set of people whose defining trait is a lack of empathy is probably a bigger overlap than you think.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - imtringued 2y ago
    I would expect them to have a greater desire for bonding than someone who has already been through a dozen relationships or possibly a divorce.
- squigz 2y ago
  Nobody is going to pay for an AI girlfriend service for it to breakup with the user and refuse to get back together - because that's how growth happens in reality. What AI girlfriends will do is mimic perfect Hollywood relationships, complete with hot makeup sex.
  - cruffle_duffle 2y ago
    Isn’t there a rule on the internet that says “if you can imagine it, there is porn for it” and “if there isn’t porn for it, somebody is making it”? I’m pretty sure that applies to this scenario too. I’m 100% sure that there exists a set of customers who would pay good money to get dumped by a realistic AI girlfriend. And once dumped they’ll turn around and pay for the next AI model to dump them only in some other fashion. Maybe the AI model thinks the customers anatomy is the wrong dimensions? Maybe they smell? Maybe they are too short or tall? Perhaps the AI “girlfriend” is a triple tentacled sea monster who wants to return to oceans on Titan? Doesn’t matter. Somebody will pay very good money to experance it. You want a hot quad breasted space babe who cheats on you with bubble wrap covered little people? Done. Want that with extra bondage? Done. This is the internet after all. Why pay for a boring “normal” AI girlfriend when the sky is the limit? I say, use your imagination.
- jjmarr 2y ago
  Your assumption is that the status quo provides those things. Nowadays, people will break up as soon as they get "the ick" or just have a rotating group of people they see. Lasting relationships are much less common than they used to be because it's easier to switch partners. People just want to chase a local maximum of constant validation that they're pretty/smart/correct. They don't see or understand the value in working through fights to create something beyond the sum of two people. AI excels at maintaining that local maximum. It can confidently reassure you better than any human can even if you're wrong. AI partners following this are successful now and people in their teens and early 20s are being hooked en masse. Historically, superior pieces of technology haven't displaced older incumbents when the learning curve is too steep. I don't see why a person dating an AI partner that has lovebombed them for several years would switch to another AI (or a person) that starts fights and bickers. Even if it's better in the long-term, that's still a marked decrease in short-term satisfaction.
  - bitzun 2y ago
    > people in their teens and early 20s are being hooked en masse. Any reference for the scale of this? It feels unlikely to me from my bubble but I only know one or two people I think would be likely to try it.
    - jjmarr 2y ago
      https://www.ark-invest.com/articles/analyst-research/is-ai-companionship-the-next-frontier-in-digital-entertainment https://www.ark-invest.com/articles/analyst-research/is-ai-c... The biggest callout is that NSFW AI already has 10% relative market share compared to OnlyFans. And there are no frontier models in that market.
  - kiba 2y ago
    The whole point of having fights and arguments at just the right level is to maximize engagement, retention and ultimately making money for the corporation. I was imagining the most diabolical addictive AI girlfriend. That's necessarily going to include 'negative' elements.
- knighthack 2y ago
  There are many successful relationships that don't involve arguments - and which are about constant peace. Relationships don't require 'arguments and fights and makeups' to be real. And if AI girlfriends offer 'ideal relationships', how is that not 'good'? You are conflating what people actually want with the artificial drama of TV shows and Hollywood/the messy scenario of reality. If people can pay to get their fantasy girlfriends/relationships brought to life, they will, and it will be successful especially if all forms of conflict/relationship dissatisfaction can be avoided.
  - kiba 2y ago
    There are many successful relationships that don't involve arguments - and which are about constant peace. I am not saying things about successful relationship. I am merely pointing out how exploitation of users can occur. Emotional bonding often occur in orderal and other challenging events. It is one of the tools that companies will use to push users' button and to exploit them for economic value. And if AI girlfriends offer 'ideal relationships', how is that not 'good'? Ideal relationships aren't necessarily good for AI companies' pocketbook.
    - nasmorn 2y ago
      Bonding to a computer program under control of a corporation is like looking for a sociopath as a partner explicitly. You would lose complete control of your life to the other side. Reciprocity is off the table completely.
Dries007 2y ago
> There is no "formula" for success in the creator economy - the winners are largely random. I think that strongly depends on what you call "the creator economy". For example, on YT it's really mostly skill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip2trao6dYw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip2trao6dYw Not that I believe its easy, nor do I think AI will be super good at it, at least not before everything else also enshittifies into the habsburg-AI-powered dead internet.
- AmericanChopper 2y ago
  The idea that success is earned through luck rather than merit is a firmly ideological position, regardless of the domain you’re talking about. If you succeeded via luck then that provides a better moral justification for the related ideological position that you should be deprived of the fruits of your labor as much as possible, for redistribution to others who were simply less lucky than you. It’s really just sour grapes. The formula for success in any field is simply to make a product that other people want to consume. It’s not 0 variance, but if you have some insight into what people want, and you do the work to execute your idea, then you can simply work through the ups and downs and success is almost inevitable.
  - darby_nine 2y ago
    > The formula for success in any field is simply to make a product that other people want to consume Well, the formula for success in selling products is this. Most people don't define success in terms of business acumen. Except, of course, businessmen. If you perceive our society as centered around successful people, of course you'll see it as merit-based. If you perceive our society as poorly run and catering to the rich, of course you'll see success as primarily a product of circumstance outside of your control. Is it so hard to see that "merit" is necessarily defined in subjective terms?
    - AmericanChopper 2y ago
      This is just arguing over phrasing. It doesn’t matter what you’re trying to do, if you’re making YouTube videos, or music, or paintings, or cakes, or web apps, or cleaning diveways, your ability to succeed boils down to your ability to provide something other people want. That is the objective source of your merit. Perhaps your own idea of success in life is something that revolves exclusively around your own satisfaction, like going off and living in the woods. But this is exactly the same situation, you’re just only trying to provide the things that one person wants in that scenario, yourself. Your ability to do this will again come down to your own merit. Of course if you’re chronically frustrated by being less successful than you would like to be, then looking for alternative explanations such as luck will be an attractive scapegoat that could excuse you from scrutinising your own capabilities. But the human inclination towards doing that is certainly not morally righteous.
bostik 2y ago
> There is no "formula" for success in the creator economy - the winners are largely random. That observation has echoes of the music industry - another extremely top-heavy creator business. There are formulaic ways to make "good enough" and "catchy enough" songs, but the window for "X enough" keeps shifting. Cranking out grunge won't be sustainable in the age of K-pop. But the massive runaway hits have been predominantly outliers for their age. They have veered far enough from the mainstream to be interesting in new ways, different enough, and surprising enough to break through. But to predict in advance what kinds of outliers will win the lottery? Largely random, indeed.
- renewiltord 2y ago
  Yeah but Rick Rubin is always involved and Max Martin has written a hell of a lot of megahits. Makes you think.
  - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
    Jack Antonoff as well. There certainly exist a handful of people who consistently produce hits for decades.
  - 71bw 2y ago
    >Rick Rubin Dear God, I've looked into his discography[1] and nearly every album I think of as great from the last 30 years is there. Seasons in the Abyss, The Life of Pablo, 99 Problems, SOAD self-titled + Toxicity, The Geto Boys self-titled, Licensed to Ill... Is this man a hit printer or something? Really shows that Metallica went to him with Death Magnetic after the joke called St. Anger lol [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Rubin_production_discography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Rubin_production_discogra...
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - sirspacey 2y ago
      His skill is helping creators do their best work. It’s a rare one.

ghaff 2y ago

From another angle, a bunch of us in the tech sector made pretty nice salaries. Very few of us were really all-stars in the sense that everyone knew who we we were on YouTube, etc. Which was fine.

kiba 2y ago

A good AI girlfriend wouldn't be a therapist but would mimics every aspect of a girlfriend, including arguments and fights and makeups, because that's how bonding occurs. That's going to be how successful AI girlfriend will be made.

l0ng1nu5 2y ago
[flagged]
- ZoomZoomZoom 2y ago
  Why? They're common people, not sociopaths.
  - Loughla 2y ago
    I think maybe it's my own personal bias, but it does feel like anyone who pays money for an AI girlfriend really won't want it to disagree with them. I believe they'll want an idyllic and fantasy version of a relationship.
    - dwattttt 2y ago
      I dunno how sustainable that scenario is, because it brings to mind the maybe apocryphal Chinese curse "may you be granted everything you wish for".
    - fsckboy 2y ago
      you are saying that the ai gf will not be like a real human female, but you are not making any argument that there is a defect in the bf's attachment to the gf.
    - SoftTalker 2y ago
      Agree. The only advantage of an AI girlfriend is that you can shut her off when you're finished with her.
    - atmavatar 2y ago
      While I grant that some and perhaps even most people won't want the AI girlfriend to disagree, there are some out there who treat arguments as a necessary and desirable spice in a relationship. That said, I can't really think of anything that would be worth arguing with an AI over.
    - kiba 2y ago
      AI girlfriend that always agree with you and never contradict anything you say isn't going to be as addicting as an AI girlfriend who on occasion disagree with you.
  - stonogo 2y ago
    I'd say the set of people who want an AI girlfriend and the set of people whose defining trait is a lack of empathy is probably a bigger overlap than you think.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- imtringued 2y ago
  I would expect them to have a greater desire for bonding than someone who has already been through a dozen relationships or possibly a divorce.
squigz 2y ago
Nobody is going to pay for an AI girlfriend service for it to breakup with the user and refuse to get back together - because that's how growth happens in reality. What AI girlfriends will do is mimic perfect Hollywood relationships, complete with hot makeup sex.
- cruffle_duffle 2y ago
  Isn’t there a rule on the internet that says “if you can imagine it, there is porn for it” and “if there isn’t porn for it, somebody is making it”? I’m pretty sure that applies to this scenario too. I’m 100% sure that there exists a set of customers who would pay good money to get dumped by a realistic AI girlfriend. And once dumped they’ll turn around and pay for the next AI model to dump them only in some other fashion. Maybe the AI model thinks the customers anatomy is the wrong dimensions? Maybe they smell? Maybe they are too short or tall? Perhaps the AI “girlfriend” is a triple tentacled sea monster who wants to return to oceans on Titan? Doesn’t matter. Somebody will pay very good money to experance it. You want a hot quad breasted space babe who cheats on you with bubble wrap covered little people? Done. Want that with extra bondage? Done. This is the internet after all. Why pay for a boring “normal” AI girlfriend when the sky is the limit? I say, use your imagination.
jjmarr 2y ago
Your assumption is that the status quo provides those things. Nowadays, people will break up as soon as they get "the ick" or just have a rotating group of people they see. Lasting relationships are much less common than they used to be because it's easier to switch partners. People just want to chase a local maximum of constant validation that they're pretty/smart/correct. They don't see or understand the value in working through fights to create something beyond the sum of two people. AI excels at maintaining that local maximum. It can confidently reassure you better than any human can even if you're wrong. AI partners following this are successful now and people in their teens and early 20s are being hooked en masse. Historically, superior pieces of technology haven't displaced older incumbents when the learning curve is too steep. I don't see why a person dating an AI partner that has lovebombed them for several years would switch to another AI (or a person) that starts fights and bickers. Even if it's better in the long-term, that's still a marked decrease in short-term satisfaction.
- bitzun 2y ago
  > people in their teens and early 20s are being hooked en masse. Any reference for the scale of this? It feels unlikely to me from my bubble but I only know one or two people I think would be likely to try it.
  - jjmarr 2y ago
    https://www.ark-invest.com/articles/analyst-research/is-ai-companionship-the-next-frontier-in-digital-entertainment https://www.ark-invest.com/articles/analyst-research/is-ai-c... The biggest callout is that NSFW AI already has 10% relative market share compared to OnlyFans. And there are no frontier models in that market.
- kiba 2y ago
  The whole point of having fights and arguments at just the right level is to maximize engagement, retention and ultimately making money for the corporation. I was imagining the most diabolical addictive AI girlfriend. That's necessarily going to include 'negative' elements.
knighthack 2y ago
There are many successful relationships that don't involve arguments - and which are about constant peace. Relationships don't require 'arguments and fights and makeups' to be real. And if AI girlfriends offer 'ideal relationships', how is that not 'good'? You are conflating what people actually want with the artificial drama of TV shows and Hollywood/the messy scenario of reality. If people can pay to get their fantasy girlfriends/relationships brought to life, they will, and it will be successful especially if all forms of conflict/relationship dissatisfaction can be avoided.
- kiba 2y ago
  There are many successful relationships that don't involve arguments - and which are about constant peace. I am not saying things about successful relationship. I am merely pointing out how exploitation of users can occur. Emotional bonding often occur in orderal and other challenging events. It is one of the tools that companies will use to push users' button and to exploit them for economic value. And if AI girlfriends offer 'ideal relationships', how is that not 'good'? Ideal relationships aren't necessarily good for AI companies' pocketbook.
  - nasmorn 2y ago
    Bonding to a computer program under control of a corporation is like looking for a sociopath as a partner explicitly. You would lose complete control of your life to the other side. Reciprocity is off the table completely.

Dries007 2y ago

> There is no "formula" for success in the creator economy - the winners are largely random. I think that strongly depends on what you call "the creator economy". For example, on YT it's really mostly skill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip2trao6dYw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip2trao6dYw Not that I believe its easy, nor do I think AI will be super good at it, at least not before everything else also enshittifies into the habsburg-AI-powered dead internet.

AmericanChopper 2y ago
The idea that success is earned through luck rather than merit is a firmly ideological position, regardless of the domain you’re talking about. If you succeeded via luck then that provides a better moral justification for the related ideological position that you should be deprived of the fruits of your labor as much as possible, for redistribution to others who were simply less lucky than you. It’s really just sour grapes. The formula for success in any field is simply to make a product that other people want to consume. It’s not 0 variance, but if you have some insight into what people want, and you do the work to execute your idea, then you can simply work through the ups and downs and success is almost inevitable.
- darby_nine 2y ago
  > The formula for success in any field is simply to make a product that other people want to consume Well, the formula for success in selling products is this. Most people don't define success in terms of business acumen. Except, of course, businessmen. If you perceive our society as centered around successful people, of course you'll see it as merit-based. If you perceive our society as poorly run and catering to the rich, of course you'll see success as primarily a product of circumstance outside of your control. Is it so hard to see that "merit" is necessarily defined in subjective terms?
  - AmericanChopper 2y ago
    This is just arguing over phrasing. It doesn’t matter what you’re trying to do, if you’re making YouTube videos, or music, or paintings, or cakes, or web apps, or cleaning diveways, your ability to succeed boils down to your ability to provide something other people want. That is the objective source of your merit. Perhaps your own idea of success in life is something that revolves exclusively around your own satisfaction, like going off and living in the woods. But this is exactly the same situation, you’re just only trying to provide the things that one person wants in that scenario, yourself. Your ability to do this will again come down to your own merit. Of course if you’re chronically frustrated by being less successful than you would like to be, then looking for alternative explanations such as luck will be an attractive scapegoat that could excuse you from scrutinising your own capabilities. But the human inclination towards doing that is certainly not morally righteous.

bostik 2y ago

> There is no "formula" for success in the creator economy - the winners are largely random. That observation has echoes of the music industry - another extremely top-heavy creator business. There are formulaic ways to make "good enough" and "catchy enough" songs, but the window for "X enough" keeps shifting. Cranking out grunge won't be sustainable in the age of K-pop. But the massive runaway hits have been predominantly outliers for their age. They have veered far enough from the mainstream to be interesting in new ways, different enough, and surprising enough to break through. But to predict in advance what kinds of outliers will win the lottery? Largely random, indeed.

renewiltord 2y ago
Yeah but Rick Rubin is always involved and Max Martin has written a hell of a lot of megahits. Makes you think.
- dumbo-octopus 2y ago
  Jack Antonoff as well. There certainly exist a handful of people who consistently produce hits for decades.
- 71bw 2y ago
  >Rick Rubin Dear God, I've looked into his discography[1] and nearly every album I think of as great from the last 30 years is there. Seasons in the Abyss, The Life of Pablo, 99 Problems, SOAD self-titled + Toxicity, The Geto Boys self-titled, Licensed to Ill... Is this man a hit printer or something? Really shows that Metallica went to him with Death Magnetic after the joke called St. Anger lol [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Rubin_production_discography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Rubin_production_discogra...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - sirspacey 2y ago
    His skill is helping creators do their best work. It’s a rare one.