[gjmacd]

Unpopular opinion. But starting a business around AI is a bad idea -- it's a tool not a business. AI is the "Object Oriented" of our times. It'll end up being something that will be used in our tooling, but I recall all those 90's companies who died miserably basing their whole business model around objects... I feel like AI has the same future.

[andreyk]

The Implicit assumption here is that AI in general is one of several possible tools to a given problem. This is true in some cases, but not in others (eg media synthesis, automated transcription/translation/classification, etc.). So I think "starting a business around AI" should imply that AI is a core necessity, not just a chosen tool. Granted, it may be just one tool among many that could be useful, even if it necessary.

[ducktective]

>This is true in some cases, but not in others

yet...

Who would have thought of something like stable-fusion just 5 years ago? It generates images out of thin air.

[alextheparrot]

There is a great deal of GAN literature on the order of 5 years old…

[mlyle]

Even those of us following that literature were surprised by the sudden improvement in image synthesis.

[visarga]

Probably even more surprised. GANs never solved the diversity problem.

[Kiro]

> but I recall all those 90's companies who died miserably basing their whole business model around objects

Do you have any examples?

[BjoernKW]

NeXT, for one. They didn't exactly die miserably, given their technology is what ultimately still runs Apple's OS software and APIs.

NeXT's business model was based on objects to some extent at least and they were enthusiastically selling object-oriented software as a business feature, rather than a technical matter only software developers care about.

Here's Steve Jobs demoing NeXTSTEP's object-oriented development environment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf5o5liZxnA

The way he explains it, it makes perfect sense (as one would expect): In an ideal world, an object-oriented software development approach not only allows non-technical people to define requirements but also enables them to compose and build applications from existing components without having to write a single line of code.

[rileyphone]

I think the model was ultimately pretty successful, with the primary example being the World Wide Web. The biggest reasons for the NeXT's failure was the decline of 68k coupled with rise of Windows IMO.

[radicalriddler]

I used to work for a company a year ago who's initial market was selling object definitions for Medical software (in Delphi). It was all HL7 spec models. They've pivoted to B2B software now rather than marketing to developers, but that was back around the 2000's that they were doing it.

[inopinatus]

Or rather, any object lessons.

[echelon]

> starting a business around AI is a bad idea

It's not based around AI. It's based around content creation. The AI part is just the means to the end.

These methods allow for easy content creation. It's akin to an industrialization of the mind. We're now currently searching for the best human interface to control the outputs so we can attain the results we want immediately and with high fidelity.

Once the images and sounds in your brain can immediately jump to the screen, you'll see what this has all been about.

I don't see how this is at all comparable to object oriented programming. These techniques solve real business and social needs. They automate entire decades of learning, hours of toil, and free up enormous capital.