I am aware that ChatGPT can be used as a tool to aid in functions that don’t involve direct legal and/or fiscal implications, but again, that’s not what ChatGPT is valued for. That’s not what’s going to make OpenAI profitable.
OpenAI has to sell a subscription service that can scale, sell ads on the free version, or they have to reach AGI.
Solving problems is not the same as automating work. That’s solves a CapEx issue (if you disregard operational costs of running AI models), but it’s not necessarily solving a problem.
I’ve already posted numerous times that AI is leading to breakthrough in medicine. But you ignore it or are incapable of comprehending since it goes agains your views on it. Like a cpu caught in a logic loop.
Here’s an easy one. It quickly reads and makes sense of huge amounts of data. Links different sets of data to find issue and opportunities and then finds ways to improve based on what it finds.
Those are problems in business being solved daily. There are many just like it that are super easy to find.
It aids in business operations. I am not denying that.
But is this solving an actual problem?
I already know you’re going to accuse me of shifting the goal post, but I will say it anyway. Sorting data is not what’s going to make OpenAI profitable unless the solutions i mentioned take place.
Again, I’m gonna respond and I already know what you will say (However, in your defense, I won’t even fully disagree with you)
Operationally, perhaps using AI to aid with data analytics/organization is cost effective in the sense that less people are needed, but it doesn’t erase the issue of the costs to run these AI models on the backend.
I would also argue that corporations specifically do not have the capital to implement a formal GPT technology, but I could be wrong.
It’s one thing to use ChatGPT on the job, but the legality of it I think is gray area. I don’t think Corporations are actively suggesting its employees to use ChatGPT, even if it’s proven that ChatGPT improves efficiency
I agree with you, but my point is that merely handling paralegal/admin work is not going to make ChatGPT/OpenAI profitable.
That’s not what ChatGPT was sold to investors to do. It was sold to investors on the premise that it will eventually reach complete AGI, which WOULD indeed revolutionize labor as we know it.
The reason investors haven’t pulled out is because Sam Altman is still selling a product that hasn’t come to fruition yet.
If ChatGPT starts charging a premium subscription, then that’s only going to add to the cost of implementation for various industries.