[report-to-trees]

Good enough for who? Random internet comments and memes, sure. I have serious doubts any business will be ok paying for a tool that outputs nonsense (or worse) 1% of the time when they are already paying people who do it well.

As depressing as it is, most business is treated as seriously as life-or-death.

[Ekaros]

I think they are probably good enough to throw some picture or some blurb of text on a site.

Not that they will replace any actual work, but many things don't require actual work.

[JPLeRouzic]

> I have serious doubts any business will be ok paying for a tool that outputs nonsense (or worse) 1% of the time ... As depressing as it is, most business is treated as seriously as life-or-death.

I did not thought about it, but it's true that if a company employs a truck driver or a surgeon, and if someone dies because of a mistake of this employee, the company is not endangered.

Yet if it uses an AI tool the company may be forced to abandon it, with serious consequences in terms of business.

[raisedbyninjas]

Good enough for the support chat bots embedded on websites.