[dkrich]

The other main difference that I can’t get past is that the Internet and cell phone were so obviously useful to a layman that you didn’t really have to explain the value proposition.

The ability to type an email for instance, and send it instantly to someone on the other side of the planet for free was something that was in such contrast to the tools of the time it can’t really be understood by someone who didn’t live through that period.

AI to me is really hyped up by some very highly regarded CEOs with strong track records in other domains and tech enthusiasts who seem hell bent on being able to look back and say they called the next Industrial Revolution. In short everyone thinks they’re the counter to Paul Krugman saying the internet would be as useful as the fax machine. Credulity levels are off the charts. It’s gotten to the point where skeptics are automatically assumed to be wrong.

But what’s missing is the obvious amazement that should come to an ordinary person and frankly I still don’t see most people naturally gravitating to these tools.

Perhaps that could be explained by how amazingly fast technology has advanced in recent years but then that in and of itself seems to call into question whether this technology that’s being called AI is truly revolutionary when compared to what’s already available.

[badestrand]

> I still don’t see most people naturally gravitating to these tools.

I barely know anyone who doesn't use ChatGPT frequently, to help wording an email or such. I agree though that in instances like this it is not transformative to society and rather one more tool that we use. We will see, IMO the impact of the current AI technology on the world is rather "medium".

[Ecstatify]

ChatGPT feels like a more advanced Grammarly. In our company, they keep creating chatbots tailored to specific domains, but with poor data quality, the ROI remains low. Right now, it's mostly hype, and a true AI revolution seems years off. Even internally, executives are questioning how to measure ROI when they see the costs. I suspect the current hype cycle could lead to the downfall of some companies that focus too heavily on developing AI features for their stakeholders.

[chipsrafferty]

I barely know anyone who does.

[pfisherman]

I think you may have a bit of hindsight bias. The internet was not immediately recognized as useful. One of my first jobs was at an e-commerce startup that folded in the dot com bust because (1) investors did not believe that our target customers would favor online shopping over ordering from physical catalogs, or (2) foresee how online sales might impact business operations or the viability / scalability of business models - such as drop shipping.

[chipsrafferty]

You don't have to say "regarded" on HN, I don't think there's censorship like reddit.

[dkrich]

Ha in this case that’s actually the word I meant but Reddit has basically made that an impossible word to use in its intended form

[pigeons]

I don't understand.

[petra]

That's because the main use case of AI is for businesses(once we solve hallucinations).

[wkat4242]

Except we will never solve that for LLMs. It's just how they work. LLM output will always be a "best guess"