4 ms·

Yeah, but so were the bored ape NFTs - none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, or interest.

by Jedd 1y ago

mrkurt 1y ago
If we try really hard, I think we can make an exhaustive list of what viral fads on the internet are not. You made a small start. none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, interest, substance, endurance, prestige, relevance, credibility, allure, staying-power, refinement, or depth.
- Aurornis 1y ago
  100 million people didn’t sign up to make that one image meme and then never use it again. That many signups is impressive no matter what. The attempts to downplay every aspect of LLM popularity are getting really tiresome.
  - jodrellblank 1y ago
    I think it sounds far more likely that 100M people signed up to poke at the latest viral novelty and create one meme, than that 100M people suddenly discovered they had a pressing long-term need for AI images all on the same day. Doesn’t it?
    - gretch 1y ago
      It's neither of these options in this false dichotomy. 100M people signed up and did at least 1 task. Then, most likely some % of them discovered it was a useful thing (if for nothing else than just to make more memes), and converted into a MAU. If I had to use my intuition, I would say it's 5% - 10%, which represents a larger product launch than most developers will ever participate in, in the context of a single day. Of course the ongoing stickiness of the MAU also depends on the ability of this particular tool to stay on top amongst increasing competition.
      - oblio 1y ago
        Apparently OpenAI is losing money like crazy on this and their conversion rates to paid are abysmal, even for the cheaper licenses. And not even their top subscription covers its cost. Uber at a 10x scale. I should add that compared to the hype, at a global level Uber is a failure. Yes, it's still a big company, yes, it's profitable now, but I think it was launched 10+ years ago and it's barely becoming net profitabile over it's existence now and shows no signs of taking over the world. Sure, it's big in the US and a few specific markets. But elsewhere it's either banned for undermining labor practices or has stiff local competition or it's just not cost competitive and it won't enter the market because without the whole "gig economy" scam it's just a regular taxi company with a better app.
        simonw 1y ago
        Is that information about their low conversion rates from credible sources?
        oblio 1y ago
        It's quite hard to say for sure, and I will prefix my comment by saying his blog posts are very long and quite doomerist about LLMs, but he makes a decent case about OpenAI financials: https://www.wheresyoured.at/wheres-the-money/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/wheres-the-money/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai-is-a-systemic-risk-to-the-tech-industry-2/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai-is-a-systemic-risk-to-the... A very solid argument is like that against propaganda: it's not so much about what is being said but what about isn't. OpenAI is basically shouting about every minor achievement from the rooftops so the fact that they are remarkably silent about financial fundamentals says something. At best something mediocre or more likely bad.
        Gerardo1 1y ago
        All very fair caveats/heads up about Ed Zitron, but just for context for others: he is an actual journalist that has been in the tech space for a long time, and has been critical of lots of large figures in tech for a long time. He has a cohesive thesis around the tech industry, so his thoughts on AI/LLMs aren't out of nowhere and disconnected. Basically, it's one of those things you may read and find that, all things considered, you don't agree with the conclusions, but there's real substance there and you'll probably benefit from reading a few of his articles.
    - ben_w 1y ago
      While 100M signing up just for one pic is certainly possible, I note that several hundred million people regularly share photographs of their lunch, so it is very plausible that in signing up for the latest meme generator they found they liked the ability to generate custom images of whatever they consider to be pretty pictures every day.
  - otabdeveloper4 1y ago
    > 100 million people didn’t sign up to make that one image meme and then never use it again. Source? They did exactly that.
    - simonw 1y ago
      What's your source for saying they did exactly that?
baq 1y ago
It’s hard to think of a worse analogy TBH. My wife is using ChatGPT to change photos (still is to this day), she didn’t use it or any other LLM until that feature hit. It is a fad, but it’s also a very useful tool. Ape NFTs are… ape NFTs. Useless. Pointless. Negative value for most people.
- senthil_rajasek 1y ago
  "My wife is using ChatGPT to change photos (still is to this day), she didn’t use it or any other LLM until that feature hit." This is deja vu, except instead of ChatGPT to edit photos it was instagram a decade ago.
  - jauntywundrkind 1y ago
    Applying some filters and adding some overlay text is something some folks did, but there's such a massive creative world that's opened up, where all we have to do is ask.
  - baq 1y ago
    You either haven’t tried it or are just trolling.
    - djhn 1y ago
      I tried it and I don’t get it. What and where are the legal usecases? What can you do with these low-resolution images?
    - senthil_rajasek 1y ago
      I am contrasting how instagram filters gave users some control and increased user base and how today editing photos with LLMs is doing the same and pulling in a wider user base.
- Jedd 1y ago
  I would note that I was replying to a comment about the 'big trend of ghiblification' of images. Reproducing a certain style of image has been a regular fad since profile pictures became a thing sometime last century. I was not meaning to suggest that large language & diffusion models are fads. (I do think their capabilities are poorly understood and/or over-estimated by non-technical and some technical people alike, but that invites a more nuanced discussion.) While I'm sure your wife is getting good value out of the system, whether it's a better fit for purpose, produces a better quality, or provides a more satisfying workflow -- than say a decent free photo editor -- or whether other tools were tried but determined to be too limited or difficult, etc -- only you or her could say. It does feel like a small sample set, though.
micromacrofoot 1y ago
they're not but I'm already seeing ai generated images on billboards for local businesses, they're in production workflows now and they aren't going anywhere
sandspar 1y ago
I just don't understand how people can see "100 million signups in a week" and immediately dismiss it. We're not talking about fidget spinners. I don't get why this sentiment is so common here on HackerNews. It's become a running joke in other online spaces, "HackerNews commenters keep saying that AI is a nothingburger." It's just a groupthink thing I guess, a kneejerk response.
- pintxo 1y ago
  I assume, when people dismiss it, they are not looking at it through the business lens and the 100m user signups KPI, but they are dismissing it on technical grounds, as an LLM is just a very big statistical database which seems incapable of solving problems beyond (impressive looking) text/image/video generation.
  - sandspar 1y ago
    Makes sense. Although I think that's an error. TikTok is "just" a video sharing site. Joe Rogan is "just" a podcaster. Dumb things that affect lots of people are important.
- otabdeveloper4 1y ago
  > We're not talking about fidget spinners. We're talking about Hitler memes instead? I don't understand your feigned outrage. The actual valid commercial use case for generative images hasn't been found yet. (No, making blog spam prettier is not a good use case.)
  - stavros 1y ago
    You're right, nothing has value unless someone figures out how to make money with it. Except OpenAI, apparently, because the fact that people buy ChatGPT to make images doesn't seem to count as a commercial use case.
    - otabdeveloper4 1y ago
      OpenAI is not profitable and we don't know if it ever will be.

Yeah, but so were the bored ape NFTs - none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, or interest.

by Jedd 1y ago

Yeah, but so were the bored ape NFTs - none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, or interest.

mrkurt 1y ago

If we try really hard, I think we can make an exhaustive list of what viral fads on the internet are not. You made a small start. none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, interest, substance, endurance, prestige, relevance, credibility, allure, staying-power, refinement, or depth.

Aurornis 1y ago
100 million people didn’t sign up to make that one image meme and then never use it again. That many signups is impressive no matter what. The attempts to downplay every aspect of LLM popularity are getting really tiresome.
- jodrellblank 1y ago
  I think it sounds far more likely that 100M people signed up to poke at the latest viral novelty and create one meme, than that 100M people suddenly discovered they had a pressing long-term need for AI images all on the same day. Doesn’t it?
  - gretch 1y ago
    It's neither of these options in this false dichotomy. 100M people signed up and did at least 1 task. Then, most likely some % of them discovered it was a useful thing (if for nothing else than just to make more memes), and converted into a MAU. If I had to use my intuition, I would say it's 5% - 10%, which represents a larger product launch than most developers will ever participate in, in the context of a single day. Of course the ongoing stickiness of the MAU also depends on the ability of this particular tool to stay on top amongst increasing competition.
    - oblio 1y ago
      Apparently OpenAI is losing money like crazy on this and their conversion rates to paid are abysmal, even for the cheaper licenses. And not even their top subscription covers its cost. Uber at a 10x scale. I should add that compared to the hype, at a global level Uber is a failure. Yes, it's still a big company, yes, it's profitable now, but I think it was launched 10+ years ago and it's barely becoming net profitabile over it's existence now and shows no signs of taking over the world. Sure, it's big in the US and a few specific markets. But elsewhere it's either banned for undermining labor practices or has stiff local competition or it's just not cost competitive and it won't enter the market because without the whole "gig economy" scam it's just a regular taxi company with a better app.
      - simonw 1y ago
        Is that information about their low conversion rates from credible sources?
        oblio 1y ago
        It's quite hard to say for sure, and I will prefix my comment by saying his blog posts are very long and quite doomerist about LLMs, but he makes a decent case about OpenAI financials: https://www.wheresyoured.at/wheres-the-money/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/wheres-the-money/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai-is-a-systemic-risk-to-the-tech-industry-2/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai-is-a-systemic-risk-to-the... A very solid argument is like that against propaganda: it's not so much about what is being said but what about isn't. OpenAI is basically shouting about every minor achievement from the rooftops so the fact that they are remarkably silent about financial fundamentals says something. At best something mediocre or more likely bad.
        Gerardo1 1y ago
        All very fair caveats/heads up about Ed Zitron, but just for context for others: he is an actual journalist that has been in the tech space for a long time, and has been critical of lots of large figures in tech for a long time. He has a cohesive thesis around the tech industry, so his thoughts on AI/LLMs aren't out of nowhere and disconnected. Basically, it's one of those things you may read and find that, all things considered, you don't agree with the conclusions, but there's real substance there and you'll probably benefit from reading a few of his articles.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    While 100M signing up just for one pic is certainly possible, I note that several hundred million people regularly share photographs of their lunch, so it is very plausible that in signing up for the latest meme generator they found they liked the ability to generate custom images of whatever they consider to be pretty pictures every day.
- otabdeveloper4 1y ago
  > 100 million people didn’t sign up to make that one image meme and then never use it again. Source? They did exactly that.
  - simonw 1y ago
    What's your source for saying they did exactly that?

baq 1y ago

It’s hard to think of a worse analogy TBH. My wife is using ChatGPT to change photos (still is to this day), she didn’t use it or any other LLM until that feature hit. It is a fad, but it’s also a very useful tool. Ape NFTs are… ape NFTs. Useless. Pointless. Negative value for most people.

senthil_rajasek 1y ago
"My wife is using ChatGPT to change photos (still is to this day), she didn’t use it or any other LLM until that feature hit." This is deja vu, except instead of ChatGPT to edit photos it was instagram a decade ago.
- jauntywundrkind 1y ago
  Applying some filters and adding some overlay text is something some folks did, but there's such a massive creative world that's opened up, where all we have to do is ask.
- baq 1y ago
  You either haven’t tried it or are just trolling.
  - djhn 1y ago
    I tried it and I don’t get it. What and where are the legal usecases? What can you do with these low-resolution images?
  - senthil_rajasek 1y ago
    I am contrasting how instagram filters gave users some control and increased user base and how today editing photos with LLMs is doing the same and pulling in a wider user base.
Jedd 1y ago
I would note that I was replying to a comment about the 'big trend of ghiblification' of images. Reproducing a certain style of image has been a regular fad since profile pictures became a thing sometime last century. I was not meaning to suggest that large language & diffusion models are fads. (I do think their capabilities are poorly understood and/or over-estimated by non-technical and some technical people alike, but that invites a more nuanced discussion.) While I'm sure your wife is getting good value out of the system, whether it's a better fit for purpose, produces a better quality, or provides a more satisfying workflow -- than say a decent free photo editor -- or whether other tools were tried but determined to be too limited or difficult, etc -- only you or her could say. It does feel like a small sample set, though.

micromacrofoot 1y ago

they're not but I'm already seeing ai generated images on billboards for local businesses, they're in production workflows now and they aren't going anywhere

sandspar 1y ago

I just don't understand how people can see "100 million signups in a week" and immediately dismiss it. We're not talking about fidget spinners. I don't get why this sentiment is so common here on HackerNews. It's become a running joke in other online spaces, "HackerNews commenters keep saying that AI is a nothingburger." It's just a groupthink thing I guess, a kneejerk response.

pintxo 1y ago
I assume, when people dismiss it, they are not looking at it through the business lens and the 100m user signups KPI, but they are dismissing it on technical grounds, as an LLM is just a very big statistical database which seems incapable of solving problems beyond (impressive looking) text/image/video generation.
- sandspar 1y ago
  Makes sense. Although I think that's an error. TikTok is "just" a video sharing site. Joe Rogan is "just" a podcaster. Dumb things that affect lots of people are important.
otabdeveloper4 1y ago
> We're not talking about fidget spinners. We're talking about Hitler memes instead? I don't understand your feigned outrage. The actual valid commercial use case for generative images hasn't been found yet. (No, making blog spam prettier is not a good use case.)
- stavros 1y ago
  You're right, nothing has value unless someone figures out how to make money with it. Except OpenAI, apparently, because the fact that people buy ChatGPT to make images doesn't seem to count as a commercial use case.
  - otabdeveloper4 1y ago
    OpenAI is not profitable and we don't know if it ever will be.