5 ms·

> AI doesn't seem to be one of those things where society as a whole will say, "we have enough of that; we don't need any more". Really? Has anyone made a usef

> AI doesn't seem to be one of those things where society as a whole will say, "we have enough of that; we don't need any more". Really? Has anyone made a useful, commercially successful product with it yet?

mrbungie 2y ago
Not even Microsoft Copilot 365 had a successful launch. The same happened with Apple Intelligence. People talk like the end user demand part of the equation is really solved when invoking an Econ 101 magical interpretation of the Law of Supply and Demand or Jevons Padadox.
- dmix 2y ago
  Apple Intelligence has barely released what they announced is coming Deep integration into iOS won't be tacked on in a rush to market addition to OS.
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    I sure hope not, because what they've released so far is worse than useless. The "notifications summaries" in particular are hilariously bad. It's the same problem with Google's "AI Overview"--wrong or misleading enough that you simply can't trust any of it. But to be clear, none of these things are commercial products. They're gimmicks. Google is an ads company, they make their money selling ads. Apple is a computer company, they make their money selling computers. These "AI products" are a circus sideshow.
roenxi 2y ago
Yeah, lots of them. I never thought I'd be paying for a search subscription but after a few months of using ChatGPT I expect to be paying for the privilege from now on. Maybe not paying OpenAI, but someone. There isn't much of a moat there, so there are going to be many companies basically on-selling GPU time. And even if for some weird reason there is no commercially successful AI-specific product it is causing shockwaves in how work is done, most people I know who are effective have worked it into their workflow somehow.
trhway 2y ago
>Really? Has anyone made a useful, commercially successful product with it yet? Aren't millions or even tens of millions students using ChatGPT for example? To me that sounds like a commercial success (and looks comparable with the usage of Google Search - a money printing machine for more almost 30 years now - in the first years) And enterprise-wise - heard recently a VP complaining about entering expenses. As we don't have secretaries anymore in the civilized world, that means "Agents AI" is going to have a blast. (i'm long on NVDA and wondering is it enough blood on the streets to buy more :)
- Barrin92 2y ago
  >To me that sounds like a commercial success It isn't because it's not making them any money. Having users doesn't mean you have a business. If you sell two dollars for one dollar having more users is not a blessing financially. Of course you could slap ads on it, like Google, but unlike Google openAI has no moat and there's already ten competitors. Competition eliminates profit and AI is being commoditized faster than pretty much anything else.
  - trhway 2y ago
    >unlike Google openAI has no moat what was Google moat? >and there's already ten potential competitors. Competition eliminates profit and AI is being commoditized faster than pretty much anything else. we're discussing NVDA. Where are its competitors? ChatGPT having 10 competitors only makes things better for NVDA. >Competition eliminates profit Competition weeds out bad/ineffective performers which is great. History of our industry is littered with competition taking out bad performers, and our industry is only better for that. Fast commoditization of AI is just great and fits the best patterns like say PC-revolution (and like it i think the AI-revolution wouldn't be just one app/user-case, it will be a tectonic shift instead).
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    Do you think the cost won’t ever come down to make $20/month sustainable?
scarface_74 2y ago
ChatGPT has over $10 million paying subscriber. No I am not counting the people using the API programmatically
- MadnessASAP 2y ago
  And they're still burning billions with no end in sight.
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    Are they losing billions on training or inference? If their current products - ChatGPT and the API - are profitable ie the inference cost is less than they charge, they have a long term sustainable business.
- goatlover 2y ago
  That doesn't make them profitable though. They spend billions.
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    I meant 10 million paying subscribers not 10 million dollars. I put the dollar sign there by mistake. That’s $2.4 billion in revenue and growing not counting API customers. The question is whether ChatGPT (the product) and running thr API is profitable or at at least whether the trend is that cost are coming down.
    - goatlover 2y ago
      Right, but they're still considerably more according to what I've seen.
- mrbungie 2y ago
  With other providers giving away similar products for free (Google AI Studio, DeepSeek et al) right now, I'm not sure that counts as commercial success when it is not sustainable. The same is happening in enterprise tier products, Copilot 365 is still an extra SKU to count while Google Gemini Advanced has been integrated into the Workspace offering (i.e. they actually force you for an upsell of ~20% per user license for something we didn't ask, but I digress). At least that's a better alternative that paying +20 USD per license. Prices need to and will go down, and business models will have to change and they are already doing so. But I'm not sure if OpenAI is really ready for that.
johnfn 2y ago
Cursor?

mrbungie 2y ago

Not even Microsoft Copilot 365 had a successful launch. The same happened with Apple Intelligence. People talk like the end user demand part of the equation is really solved when invoking an Econ 101 magical interpretation of the Law of Supply and Demand or Jevons Padadox.

dmix 2y ago
Apple Intelligence has barely released what they announced is coming Deep integration into iOS won't be tacked on in a rush to market addition to OS.
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  I sure hope not, because what they've released so far is worse than useless. The "notifications summaries" in particular are hilariously bad. It's the same problem with Google's "AI Overview"--wrong or misleading enough that you simply can't trust any of it. But to be clear, none of these things are commercial products. They're gimmicks. Google is an ads company, they make their money selling ads. Apple is a computer company, they make their money selling computers. These "AI products" are a circus sideshow.

roenxi 2y ago

Yeah, lots of them. I never thought I'd be paying for a search subscription but after a few months of using ChatGPT I expect to be paying for the privilege from now on. Maybe not paying OpenAI, but someone. There isn't much of a moat there, so there are going to be many companies basically on-selling GPU time. And even if for some weird reason there is no commercially successful AI-specific product it is causing shockwaves in how work is done, most people I know who are effective have worked it into their workflow somehow.

trhway 2y ago

>Really? Has anyone made a useful, commercially successful product with it yet? Aren't millions or even tens of millions students using ChatGPT for example? To me that sounds like a commercial success (and looks comparable with the usage of Google Search - a money printing machine for more almost 30 years now - in the first years) And enterprise-wise - heard recently a VP complaining about entering expenses. As we don't have secretaries anymore in the civilized world, that means "Agents AI" is going to have a blast. (i'm long on NVDA and wondering is it enough blood on the streets to buy more :)

Barrin92 2y ago
>To me that sounds like a commercial success It isn't because it's not making them any money. Having users doesn't mean you have a business. If you sell two dollars for one dollar having more users is not a blessing financially. Of course you could slap ads on it, like Google, but unlike Google openAI has no moat and there's already ten competitors. Competition eliminates profit and AI is being commoditized faster than pretty much anything else.
- trhway 2y ago
  >unlike Google openAI has no moat what was Google moat? >and there's already ten potential competitors. Competition eliminates profit and AI is being commoditized faster than pretty much anything else. we're discussing NVDA. Where are its competitors? ChatGPT having 10 competitors only makes things better for NVDA. >Competition eliminates profit Competition weeds out bad/ineffective performers which is great. History of our industry is littered with competition taking out bad performers, and our industry is only better for that. Fast commoditization of AI is just great and fits the best patterns like say PC-revolution (and like it i think the AI-revolution wouldn't be just one app/user-case, it will be a tectonic shift instead).
- scarface_74 2y ago
  Do you think the cost won’t ever come down to make $20/month sustainable?

scarface_74 2y ago

ChatGPT has over $10 million paying subscriber. No I am not counting the people using the API programmatically

MadnessASAP 2y ago
And they're still burning billions with no end in sight.
- scarface_74 2y ago
  Are they losing billions on training or inference? If their current products - ChatGPT and the API - are profitable ie the inference cost is less than they charge, they have a long term sustainable business.
goatlover 2y ago
That doesn't make them profitable though. They spend billions.
- scarface_74 2y ago
  I meant 10 million paying subscribers not 10 million dollars. I put the dollar sign there by mistake. That’s $2.4 billion in revenue and growing not counting API customers. The question is whether ChatGPT (the product) and running thr API is profitable or at at least whether the trend is that cost are coming down.
  - goatlover 2y ago
    Right, but they're still considerably more according to what I've seen.
mrbungie 2y ago
With other providers giving away similar products for free (Google AI Studio, DeepSeek et al) right now, I'm not sure that counts as commercial success when it is not sustainable. The same is happening in enterprise tier products, Copilot 365 is still an extra SKU to count while Google Gemini Advanced has been integrated into the Workspace offering (i.e. they actually force you for an upsell of ~20% per user license for something we didn't ask, but I digress). At least that's a better alternative that paying +20 USD per license. Prices need to and will go down, and business models will have to change and they are already doing so. But I'm not sure if OpenAI is really ready for that.

johnfn 2y ago

Cursor?