And because there's something in the human mind that has a very strong reaction to being talked to, and because LLMs are specifically good at mimicking plausible human speech patterns, chatGPT really, really hooked a lot of people (including said VC/private money people).

User count going up? Sure.

New browser that will deeply integrate chatGPT into users lives and give OAI access to their browsing/shopping data? Sure

Several new hardware products that are totally coming in the next several months? Sure

We're totally going to start delivering ads? Sure

We're making commitments to all these compute providers because our growth is totally going to warrant it? Sure

Oh, since we're investing in all of that compute, we're also going to become a compute vendor! Sure

None of it is particularly intentional, strategic, or sound. OAI is a money pit, they can always see the end of the runway, and must secure funding now. That is their perpetual state.

Did your product fail to render those services? Or do damage to the customer by operating outside of the boundaries of your agreement?

There is no difference between "Company A did not fulfill the services they agreed to fulfill" and "Company A's product did not fulfill the services they agreed to fulfill", therefore there is no difference between "Company A's product, in the category of AI agents, did not fulfill the services they agreed to fulfill."

It's just that you can't advertise that, or you ruin the service.

And it already does work. See the sweet, sweet deal Anthropic got recently (and if you think $1.5B isn't a good deal, look at the range of of compensation they could have been subject to had they gone to court and lost).

Remember the story about Replit's LLM deleting a production database? All the stories were AI goes rogue, AI deletes database, etc.

If an Amazon RDS database was just wiped a production DB out of nowhere, with no reason, the story wouldn't be "Rogue hosted database service deletes DB" it would be "AWS randomly deletes production DB" (and, AWS would take a serious reputational hit because of that).

$500B/$100,000 is 5 million, or 167k 30-year careers.

The math is ludicrous, and the people saying it's fine are incomnprehensible to me.

Another comment on a similar post just said, no hyperbole, irony, or joke intended: "Just you switching away from Google is already justifying 1T infrastructure spend."

That's bread and butter development work.

These are business customers buying a consumer-facing product.

1 trillion dollars is justified because people use chatGPT instead of google sometimes?

That's fair but it's what I believe.

...see?

Being consistent with stating your beliefs isn't the same as engaging with and about those beliefs.

Advertising isn't conversation. Evangelism isn't discussion.

That response suggests you aren't interested in discussion or conversation at all.

It suggests that your purpose here is to advertise.

- https://tryapril.com/security - https://tryapril.com/privacy

Can you support that assertion in a more rigorous way than "when I do that I seem to get better results?"