If I didn't come to Lemmy I probably wouldn't even know about the loud minority hating it. All the real people in my life either like it or don't have much of an opinion to begin with.
Perspectivist
joined 5 months ago
It's more like the opposite. There's not much evidence if it saving money or increasing productivity for companies to the extent that it covers the cost of running it where as for the general population it can be helpful with stuff like writing assistance but I bet most people use it like I do which is entertainment. ChatGPT has 800 million weekly users - people clearly are getting some value from it.
Would be a lot quicker and easier if you just googled it yourself.
OpenAI's annualized revenue hits $10 billion, up from $5.5 billion in December 2024
OpenAI hits $12 billion in annualized revenue, The Information reports
OpenAI (MSFT) Revenue Doubles to $10 Billion as AI Adoption Accelerates
OpenAI revenue doubles to $12 bn, clocks in 700 mn weekly ChatGPT users
OpenAI hits $12 Billion annualized revenue with 700M weekly users
OpenAI generates $4.3 billion in revenue in first half of 2025, the Information reports
OpenAI has five years to turn $13 billion into $1 trillion
OpenAI hits $10 billion in annual recurring revenue fueled by ChatGPT growth
Would you care to provide any evidence for your speculation that people are willing to pay enough for AI to sustain its costs?
ChatGPT alone has 800 million weekly users and their total revenue in 2025 was 13 billion with 70% coming from normal users. That's drop in the bucket though considering they've commited to investing a trillion dollars into new computing capacity over the next 10 years.
"Nope" implies you already have a source proving me wrong.
I'm not particularly enthusiastic about grocery shopping. I go to LIDL because it's the cheapest.
They're losing money mostly because of massive investments in new datacenters and GPUs. Not because people are not willing to pay for using it.
ChatGPT alone has 800 million weekly users of which the vast majority are normal people - not companies. The demand is there despite it not being able to increase company profit margins the way people expected. I don't see this computing infrastructure needing to run idle anytime soon.
My Leatherman Wave and my olive green Shemagh scarf are both close to 20 years old now so would be quite a bummer to lose either one of them. The Leatherman already almost got stolen once.
I bet this guy gets sponsorship offer after another and he refuses all of them. He has multiple videos in progress all the time. Some take years to finish. He might do a job and then at the end of the video he revisits the site half year later or for example waits for a rainy day to shoot video of how the new drainage ditch works. I challenge anyone to find a more authetic YouTuber.
I don't think they serve any other purpose than to signal that the person wishes to come across as considerate.
If it's gore, porn or such then yeah but if we're speaking of just text then no.
AI has existed for decades. The chessbot on Atari is an AI.
What doesn't exist is AGI but that's not synonymous with AI. Most people just don't know the right terms here and bunch it all together as if it was all one thing.
If one is expecting a large language model designed to generate natural sounding language to be generally intelligent like an sci-fi AI assistant then no wonder they find it lacking. They're expecting autonomous driving from a cruise control.