I think it's safe to assume more models will be introduced and vendor lock-in can be avoided, but I find it hard to believe some of the "simpler" ideas can create compelling, VC-scale businesses.
Not every experience is going to be best suited to fit in a chat box like ChatGPT which opens the door for startups like this one to build something new.
I'm excited when I see products like this, and I think we really need to retire the critique of "Its just an API call to OpenAI". While yes that is a core part of it, there is a lot of time and effort that goes into developing these experiences that has value
I'm sure they imagine that when they figure out something actually worth doing, they'll already have a user base and revenue stream and reputation. If there's somebody out there doing something more innovative, they'll either buy them out or reproduce their idea in-house.
Me, I'm skeptical that there's a "there" here. But that's why somebody else is getting rich and I'm not.
Thus, because the executives want Altman to succeed (to presumably advance their own career) and because they're in charge of YC, which is an investor in openai, they have every incentive in funding startups that then use OpenAI as the main platform.
That's not how YC or VC works.
Rather, YC is banking that some of the use cases get people hooked, thus causing vendor lock in, to these new apps, which end up benefiting YC both by benefitting the companies they're funding as well as benefitting open ai.
I don't share the sentiment that companies that are 'just' layers over OpenAI are incapable of building moats.