> This doesn't mean ChatGPT will forever be what people use. Maybe it will fail spectacularly in a year. But it's OpenAI's game to lose here, not the other way around.
The AVERAGE person still does not even know what ChatGPT is.
At most, 1 in 10 people have ever used ChatGPT.
This is like saying Social Networking is MySpace's to lose. Not really. Most people hadn't heard of Social Media or MySpace when MySpace was already huge and - by far - the biggest player.
It is likely easier for Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, or Google to introduce >50% of the population to an LLM than for ChatGPT to get from ~2.5% to >50%.
ChatGPT monthly users is about 1 in 40 people, by the way.
Does that mean ChatGPT is doomed to fail. No.
ChatGPT could easily be the winner.
But declaring the race over unless ChatGPT blows both its legs off seems very premature.
> This is like saying Social Networking is MySpace's to lose
But it was. If MySpace had evolved, and stayed ahead of trends, and cannibalized their own products, and really understood the value of social networks... they could have leveraged their initial lead to a dominant position.
Saying the market is ChatGPT's to lose does not mean they can be lazy or incompetent or even just merely good. It means that all things equal, if OpenAI executes at an equal level to their competitors, ChatGPT will win.
It's like saying a marathon is the front-runner's race to lose. It's simply true. It does not mean the race is over.
>The AVERAGE person still does not even know what ChatGPT is.
Who is "the average person" here ?
How unknown do you think the site that got over 3.7B visits (#8 in internet worldwide traffic) last month is ?
The idea that chatgpt is this unknown thing doesn't hold up to any scrutiny at all.