| > the traffic to ChatGPT is decreasing and has been for over two months now This seems entirely unsurprising, and isn’t by itself enough to support your general thesis. Interacting with these LLMs was extremely novel for most people when the tech first dropped, and those earlier months were the peak of the viral growth/expansion into public awareness. As the novelty dies down, it’s not surprising that there would be less traffic. Early on, I had all sorts of ridiculous conversations just to see what would happen. Now, I only use it when I have some task in mind. That transition points to this being the opposite of a toy - after the fun dies down, the real work begins. > My anecdotal evidence…is that many normies tried it a few times and it was a topic of conversation but is no longer mentioned much. This has not been my experience at all. Most non-technical folks I know who are interested in ChatGPT see value in its ability to expand their technical capabilities/knowledge. People who are motivated to learn will continue to use this to their advantage. If some subset of that population has no such interest, this has no bearing on the usefulness of the tech, nor is it representative of the population. And even if the “normie” population (this is pretty reductive…) abandons it entirely, this again says nothing about the value/utility of LLMs, and hints at a product/market fit issue. We don’t say programming languages are useless because they’re not adopted by the general public. |
The "intelligence" behind it is too unpredictable to be reliable for work, and using it for fun is about as amusing as emailing HR.