Hacker News Reader

Comment by otabdeveloper4 | Hacker News Reader

> We're not talking about fidget spinners.

We're talking about Hitler memes instead? I don't understand your feigned outrage.

The actual valid commercial use case for generative images hasn't been found yet. (No, making blog spam prettier is not a good use case.)

View on HN

Everything Everywhere All At Once won a bunch of Oscars. They used generative AI tools for some of their post-production work (achieved by a tiny team), for example to help clean up the backgrounds in the scene with the silent dialog between the two rocks.

You're right, nothing has value unless someone figures out how to make money with it. Except OpenAI, apparently, because the fact that people buy ChatGPT to make images doesn't seem to count as a commercial use case.

OpenAI is not profitable and we don't know if it ever will be.

Have we shifted the goalposts from "something people will pay for" to "needs to be profitable even with massive R&D" then?

OpenAI is not "something people will pay for" at the moment though.

Except lots of people are paying for it. I'll refer you to the other post on the front page for the calculation that OpenAI would have to get just an extra $10/yr from their users to break even.

Your response reminds me of that joke about selling a dollar bill for ninety cents.

Your response makes me think we have different definitions for profitability.

OpenAI is not profitable because it is spending resources into moving forward and training new models and creating new tools.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com