[benterix]

> The question is really only: Will users actually want to continue to use these services once the novelty wears off? The assumption is that they are useful enough to become an integral part of our lives, but time will tell...

But LLMs do have some niche, stable applications already. For example, they replaced Stack Overflow to a large extent, because you can get the answer you need faster, and it's often better adapted to your situation. So you could argue the novelty of SO wore off a long time ago but people were still using it when LLMs appeared. ChatGPT is no more en vogue, people are ashamed to (and shamed for) using it, but it still has some uses, helping people in their jobs and lives in general.

[9rx]

Stack Overflow wasn't bringing in hundreds of billions in revenue and never could have hoped to. A niche won't cut it.

I mean, should it all come crashing down and once the dust settles there is no doubt room for a niche service to rise from the ashes. Many have predicted exactly that AI will have its own "dark fibre" moment. But the current crop of providers seeking "world domination" won't survive if they can only carve out a SO-style niche.

[tempodox]

> Stack Overflow wasn't bringing in hundreds of billions in revenue

Neither do LLMs. Instead, they cost hundreds of billions. Whether those investments can ever be recovered is still an unanswered question.

[9rx]

> Neither do LLMs.

Not yet. Of course, if you had read the thread you'd know that LLM businesses are trying to see if they can capture Facebook-scale/beyond user bases in order to serve ads to them at Facebook-scale/beyond.

> Whether those investments can ever be recovered is still an unanswered question.

Yes, that's the question we are discussing. Welcome to many comments ago.