I think it's broken out into mainstream adoption and is going to stay there.
It reminds me a little of Napster. The Napster UI was terrible, but it let people do something they had never been able to do before: listen to any piece of music ever released, on-demand. As a result people with almost no interest in technology at all were learning how to use it.
Most people have never had the ability to turn a photo of their kids into a cute cartoon before, and it turns out that's something they really want to be able to do.
none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, interest, substance, endurance, prestige, relevance, credibility, allure, staying-power, refinement, or depth.
That many signups is impressive no matter what. The attempts to downplay every aspect of LLM popularity are getting really tiresome.
Doesn’t it?
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.
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.
https://www.wheresyoured.at/wheres-the-money/
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.
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.
Source? They did exactly that.
Ape NFTs are… ape NFTs. Useless. Pointless. Negative value for most people.
This is deja vu, except instead of ChatGPT to edit photos it was instagram a decade ago.
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.
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.)
It really is incredible.