FaceDeer

deleted by creator

They got their user base by being the first ones to have open access to it. Being the first to market OFC gives a massive advantage.

Right, and then everyone chose to go use them.

This isn’t AI vs everything. This is ONLY the “AI” products compared to themselves

Every single one of them showed an increase in user growth, Microsoft just didn’t grow as much as the others. They’re not just shuffling the same users around, they’re continuing to gain new ones.

And as I pointed out in another response to you, chatgpt.com is the fourth-most-visited website in the world. They’re doing that with just a thousand users?

chatgpt.com is the fourth-most-visted website in the world (as of September, when this data is from). That’s the website, not the API. People have to choose to go to the chatgpt.com website in their browser, when OpenAI’s APIs are used by other products they don’t go to the chatgpt.com website. The API is at openai.com.

How are all those people people being “forced” to go to chatgpt.com?

Alright. So for purposes of argument, let’s accept all of that. Microsoft and Google are just faking it all, everyone’s tricked or forced into using their AI offerings.

The whole table from the article:

ChatGPT by far has the bigger established user base. How did they force and/or trick everyone into using them?

Claude AI is growing their userbase faster than Google, how are they tricking and/or forcing everyone to switch over to them?

None of these other AI service providers, except for Grok, have a pre-existing platform with users that they can capture artificially. People are willingly going over to these services and using them. Both Microsoft and Google could vanish completely and it would take out less than a third of the AI search market.

And yet beating out both of them by a very wide margin, with 61.30% of the AI search share, is ChatGPT. Which didn’t have any established reputation or pre-installed userbase or anything at all that either Microsoft or Google started out with.

Your friend uses Gemini, presumably willingly. That’s not “faked.” This narrative of “nobody wants AI” is false, it’s just popular among social media bubbles where people want it to be true.

They’ve got 70% of the desktop operating system share. Seems like every other thread about them around these parts is how they’re “shoving AI down everyones’ throats.” I’m dubious that they’re “easier to ignore.”

So why aren’t Microsoft’s numbers going up? Everyone’s faking it except them?

Rare to see an AI-positive article getting so many upvotes on @technology@beehaw.org.

According to the chart in the article every AI is seeing stronger growth than Copilot, on a percentage gain basis. Gemini’s just the one that looks like it’s about to surpass Copilot in total market share.

So not only are people not reading the articles any more, they’re not even finishing reading the headlines all the way through?

It’s funny seeing the sudden surge of “copyright is awesome!” On the Internet now that it’s become a useful talking point to bludgeon the hated Abominable Intelligence with.

Have any actual court cases established that Gemini is violating copyright, BTW? The major cases I’ve seen so far have been coming down on the “training AI is fair use” side of things, any copyright issues have largely been ancillary to that.

Okay, wow. I’ve garnered plenty of downvotes on the Fediverse by not auto-hating many of Microsoft’s new features and updates, I’m sure I’ve been labelled a “Microsoft shill” or somesuch in some folks’ user notes. But this is just ridiculous.

The single most important rule Microsoft should have is “thou shalt not brick thy customers’ computers with a routine update.” Sure, it’s not the most common set of triggering conditions in the world, but the problem is immediate and obvious upon booting up. How do they not have a test plan that would catch this?

Back in my day you googled to find an LLM.

Use one of the many alternative LLMs.

I would recommend continuing to use Firefox until you actually don’t like it, rather than switch because of yet another social media post raging about AI. 90% of the time I’ve seen people complaining about AI being “shoved in their faces” it’s something that I had no idea existed and had to actively seek out and enable to see it in action.

Just don’t use features that you don’t want to use.

Everything is amazing and nobody is happy.

It works because the .png and .jpg extensions are associated on your system with programs that, by coincidence, are also able to handle webp images and that check the binary content of the file to figure out what format they are when they’re handling them.

If there’s a program associated with .png on a system that doesn’t know how to handle webp, or that trusts the file extension when deciding how to decode the contents of the file, it will fail on these renamed files. This isn’t a reliable way to “fix” these sorts of things.

So it’s basically “nobody wants to use it because nobody is using it.”

I actually rather like it, and at this point many of the tools I use have caught up so I don’t mind it any more myself.

I’m sure this thread will have more than just knee-jerk scary “feels” or inaccurate pop culture references in it, and we’ll be able to have a nice discussion about what the technology in the linked article is actually about.

If you believe that Google’s just going to brazenly lie about what they’re doing, what’s the point of changing the settings at all then?

In fact, Google is subject to various laws and they’re subject to concerns by big corporate customers, both of which could result in big trouble if they end up flagrantly and wilfully misusing data that’s supposed to be private. So yes, I would tend to believe that if the feature doesn’t say the data is being used for training I tend to believe that. It at least behooves those who claim otherwise to come up with actual evidence of their claims.

You are being sarcastic but this is indeed the case. Especially for companies like Google, which are concerned about being sued or dumped by major corporations that very much don’t want their data to be used for training without permission.

There’s a bit of a free-for-all with published data these days, but private data is another matter.