It could be argued that the adoption of the automobile was a bad move.

You and I debating either its efficacy or social good though is irrelevant if it marches on regardless.

I didn't explain my point there, let me try with the automobile example.

There's a key difference in the how the impact of the automobile happened - consumers got to choose to buy them and the impact was driven in large part by market demand.

The fact that LLMs are going to have a big impact seems obvious because a comparatively few number of people are making a huge deal out of them, both with attention and money. LLMs will be big but that says nothing of their usefulness or even consumer demand, it says more about how the industry is being financed.

I'm not too worried about Big Corporation trying to push a rope. In the end it really is only going to succeed if "we" want it — find value in it.

> only going to succeed if "we" want it — find value in it.

I'll be pleasantly surprised if that's how it turns out.

At least so far market dynamics haven't really been much of a driver for LLMs. Those with the money think its the next big thing and are pouring cash both into the LLMs themselves and any product that slaps a "powered by AI" sticker on the box.

That's not to say people aren't also actively choosing to use LLMs, but in my opinion the market demand doesn't account for the massive amount of hype and funding, or the pervasiveness of LLMs being added to so many products.

I see it too — but I'll remind both of us that these are still very, very early days.

For sure. And I definitely have a bias showing here towards not trusting the person in charge to be benevolent or to actually know what the "right" thing to do is in the long run.