Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
It’s strange to see extreme amount of hysteria on this. There’s enough market competition to not allow this.

If ChatGPT is doing it then just move to Claude. If all are doing it then surely opensource models are a good alternative.

But i think leaning into the hysteria provides some comfort

loading story #47208419
While it isn't a perfect comparison, streaming platforms that have ad-subsidized subscriptions with ads (as the name suggests) certainly haven't been driven out by market competition.

I believe hysteria in this case is healthy, so we can end up with something closer the still fairly reasonable implementation of the streaming platforms, instead of the example here.

> streaming platforms that have ad-subsidized subscriptions with ads (as the name suggests) certainly haven't been driven out by market competition

which ones don't have an ad free tier?

loading story #47207487
loading story #47209588
It's interesting to contrast this take with the opinions expressed on an earlier thread about OpenAI's moat (or lack thereof).

Several people pointed to Google Search as an example of "user count as moat", and an explanation of its continued dominance despite a results page dominated by "sponsored" results.

Presumably the same reasoning would apply here.

Assuming chatgpt has moat, what kind of moat would apply that it is so crucial that it won't allow people to move away from it?
loading story #47207090
> There’s enough market competition to not allow this.

Why do people think it will NOT happen? There are tons and tons of examples out there where it happened exactly like this over and over again. Why would AI suddenly be the exception?

It's really not about competition. It's about who gets the users first and/or does the best marketing

loading story #47209860
We didn't see the majority switch from Google to Duckduckgo because of ads or privacy... Being the "default" brings network effects that is hard to switch away.
there was no good way to pay for google to remove ads. do you not think that the primary reason was that people just weren't bothered by ads?

in contrast to youtube where people do pay to remove ads - like me.

You can still have 10 different providers with advertising.

Although I agree more competition will act as a counter to spoiling the experience with advertising.

loading story #47208427
The cost to train and run these things is going to lead to fewer players eventually. I suspect we end up with 2 or 3 big players in 10 years.
1. Open source models are already at Sonnnet 4.5 levels. For a lot of people’s needs, that's going to be sufficient.

2. Costs will come down as more efficient AI hardware continues to roll out, and once demand eventually catches up with supply in the coming years.

3. So super low cost (or free ad-supported) options will exist, and people will only pay more (in money or ads) for superior quality.

… unless training sources become pay to play?

That's not how enshittification, vendor lock in, and network effects work. You're participating in the collective delusion that we have perfect market competition.
explain the dynamics of how enshittification would work here?
loading story #47206987
People stay on the shitty platform because it is convenient and still does what they need.

See extreme-enshitification-of-already-shitty Windows vs free Linux.

loading story #47207079
Most LLM users are not techies
How does that matter? I can vibecode a ChatGPT clone in 30 min that uses gpt apis and sell it at subscription.
{"deleted":true,"id":47206810,"parent":47206791,"time":1772374086,"type":"comment"}