4 ms·
Part of this is because we aren’t paying the actual cost of these chatbots. If ChatGPT wasn’t essentially free for casual users then we’d definitely see a much
by Forgeties79 7mo ago
Part of this is because we aren’t paying the actual cost of these chatbots. If ChatGPT wasn’t essentially free for casual users then we’d definitely see a much smaller/slower adoption rate. I wonder if a single person using them, even paying for tokens, isn’t substantially subsidized. Probably not but I’m speculating.
If 3D printers could’ve given usage away for years directly in our homes then I bet we would’ve seen wider adoption there too.
- zozbot234 7mo agoChat bots can run on your local hardware these days, even mobile phone hardware. That's effectively free.
- Forgeties79 7mo agoI get this may seem nitpicky but that is by definition not free, and good luck running even the lightest LLM’s on 8gb ram consumer hardware. 16gb is barely sufficient and you probably need a new MacBook to really stretch that. People aren’t going to wait minutes per response for clearly inferior results compared to what they get for free on ChatGPT in browser in seconds, whether it’s logical or not. Not to mention they can’t ask more than a few questions tops before the whole thing crumbles. Expectations and reality are too far apart here. Let’s also address another real issue: what are they going to use? LM studio? Is that really a user experience most will tolerate?
- elAhmo 7mo agoWell, we are not paying for Gmail, Youtube, TikTok either, all sorts of other services that are free as well.
- pixl97 7mo agoWell, we are paying for it, but not directly with cash.
- generic92034 7mo agoBut certainly indirectly with cash. All the advertised products are more expensive than they could be, due to the costs of advertising. This comes out of everyone's pocket.
- Forgeties79 7mo agoYou’re right but I’m not sure what you’re driving at