HN users are saying that once they start pumping ChatGPT full of ads this could be profitable. I'm not so sure but we will see. I don't really use LLMs much outside of coding. Honestly I don't...
HN users are saying that once they start pumping ChatGPT full of ads this could be profitable. I'm not so sure but we will see. I don't really use LLMs much outside of coding. Honestly I don't think the ChatGPT-like products have much staying power. LLMs are better when tightly integrated into products like with Cursor.
I'd agree that targeted integration is probably more useful than a generic chatbot, but I'm curious if there's much difference between the difference chat models? Why wouldn't people switch to a...
I'd agree that targeted integration is probably more useful than a generic chatbot, but I'm curious if there's much difference between the difference chat models? Why wouldn't people switch to a different model if one of them starts spamming ads? I don't use ai so genuinely have no idea what a given model's USP is and if that difference is big enough to make people put up with increased ads.
I imagine the only thing that would keep people around would be the chat app's knowledge of the user and its supplemental tools - like image generation. Generally the top models between Anthropic,...
I imagine the only thing that would keep people around would be the chat app's knowledge of the user and its supplemental tools - like image generation. Generally the top models between Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google are close in performance. If ads end up being necessary then Google (possibly Meta) will absolutely be the winner. They can both subsidize their LLMs indefinitely thanks to their existing ad business and already have the data to make what ads they do inject higher quality, which would mean they need less of them.
The main market I see outside of coding (or perhaps tangential) is help documentation. Its a generic interface to your help documentation that you wrote forever and no one reads. "how do I do...
The main market I see outside of coding (or perhaps tangential) is help documentation.
Its a generic interface to your help documentation that you wrote forever and no one reads. "how do I do blah" typed into google or whatever gets people lost on garbage fast and doesn't iterate well when you say "but what about blah in my case?"
LLM's do handle that decently well. Not great, but given that most companies are sitting on MILLIONS on optimizations if they could just get their userbase to use 10% more of their O365 tools or whatever, it might pencil out.
The problem is, how do you market that? Are you going to make them pay for easier to use, one and done, help documentation? Do i not just have one account then for trainee's/occasional use? There's no fucking way it works if you start shoving ads in, and you STILL run the risk of "look it worked the last 10 times so I just did what it said again? How was I supposed to know it did the math wrong and now we've got a 40% shortfall?" thing.
If it's just there for semantic search then the onus is on the documentation, not the AI. I really like semantic search as a feature and wish it was more prevalent.
If it's just there for semantic search then the onus is on the documentation, not the AI. I really like semantic search as a feature and wish it was more prevalent.
Well they're going to allow direct sales (from Etsy if I'm not mistaken?) which should boost their revenue if it proves to be successful. Very much a shake the tree and see what falls out...
Well they're going to allow direct sales (from Etsy if I'm not mistaken?) which should boost their revenue if it proves to be successful. Very much a shake the tree and see what falls out situation though!
I find Etsy to be questionable too. Rather the precedent and how they may integrate more and more of those deals if the Etsy deal is successful. It's the logical next step, or even end game, to...
I find Etsy to be questionable too. Rather the precedent and how they may integrate more and more of those deals if the Etsy deal is successful. It's the logical next step, or even end game, to direct sell to customers. If there's anything in AI that will turn a profit, because not a single one of them is profitable right now, it'll be direct sales.
I imagine that by "ad" they mean marketing, and that includes the cost of providing ChatGPT to free users. I don't know how to confirm that, though. I wonder what the non-cash operating losses are?
OpenAI also spent US$2 billion on sales and ad
I imagine that by "ad" they mean marketing, and that includes the cost of providing ChatGPT to free users. I don't know how to confirm that, though.
Operating losses reached US$7.8 billion, and the company said it burned US$2.5 billion in cash.
I wouldn't normally think of stock options as an operating loss, particularly not for people working in R&D. But maybe it would if they work in operations?
I wouldn't normally think of stock options as an operating loss, particularly not for people working in R&D. But maybe it would if they work in operations?
HN users are saying that once they start pumping ChatGPT full of ads this could be profitable. I'm not so sure but we will see. I don't really use LLMs much outside of coding. Honestly I don't think the ChatGPT-like products have much staying power. LLMs are better when tightly integrated into products like with Cursor.
I'd agree that targeted integration is probably more useful than a generic chatbot, but I'm curious if there's much difference between the difference chat models? Why wouldn't people switch to a different model if one of them starts spamming ads? I don't use ai so genuinely have no idea what a given model's USP is and if that difference is big enough to make people put up with increased ads.
I imagine the only thing that would keep people around would be the chat app's knowledge of the user and its supplemental tools - like image generation. Generally the top models between Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google are close in performance. If ads end up being necessary then Google (possibly Meta) will absolutely be the winner. They can both subsidize their LLMs indefinitely thanks to their existing ad business and already have the data to make what ads they do inject higher quality, which would mean they need less of them.
The main market I see outside of coding (or perhaps tangential) is help documentation.
Its a generic interface to your help documentation that you wrote forever and no one reads. "how do I do blah" typed into google or whatever gets people lost on garbage fast and doesn't iterate well when you say "but what about blah in my case?"
LLM's do handle that decently well. Not great, but given that most companies are sitting on MILLIONS on optimizations if they could just get their userbase to use 10% more of their O365 tools or whatever, it might pencil out.
The problem is, how do you market that? Are you going to make them pay for easier to use, one and done, help documentation? Do i not just have one account then for trainee's/occasional use? There's no fucking way it works if you start shoving ads in, and you STILL run the risk of "look it worked the last 10 times so I just did what it said again? How was I supposed to know it did the math wrong and now we've got a 40% shortfall?" thing.
If it's just there for semantic search then the onus is on the documentation, not the AI. I really like semantic search as a feature and wish it was more prevalent.
Well they're going to allow direct sales (from Etsy if I'm not mistaken?) which should boost their revenue if it proves to be successful. Very much a shake the tree and see what falls out situation though!
I really don’t see that being a high value integration. But their planned integration with Shopify will at least be lucrative for partners.
I find Etsy to be questionable too. Rather the precedent and how they may integrate more and more of those deals if the Etsy deal is successful. It's the logical next step, or even end game, to direct sell to customers. If there's anything in AI that will turn a profit, because not a single one of them is profitable right now, it'll be direct sales.
I imagine that by "ad" they mean marketing, and that includes the cost of providing ChatGPT to free users. I don't know how to confirm that, though.
I wonder what the non-cash operating losses are?
I’d imagine mostly stock based compensation.
I wouldn't normally think of stock options as an operating loss, particularly not for people working in R&D. But maybe it would if they work in operations?