Surely you're not saying everyone is using them wrong. Let's say only 99% of them are using LLMs wrong, and the remaining 1% creates $100B of economic value. That's $100B of upside.
Yes the costs of training AI models these days are really high too, but now we're just making a quantitative argument, not a qualitative one.
The fact that we've discovered a near-magical tech that everyone wants to experiment with in various contexts, is evidence that the tech is probably going somewhere.
Historically speaking, I don't think any scientific invention or technology has been adopted and experimented with so quickly and on such a massive scale as LLMs.
It's crazy that people like you dismiss the tech simply because people want to experiment with it. It's like some of you are against scientific experimentation for some reason.
Yes the costs of training AI models these days are really high too, but now we're just making a quantitative argument, not a qualitative one.
The fact that we've discovered a near-magical tech that everyone wants to experiment with in various contexts, is evidence that the tech is probably going somewhere.
Historically speaking, I don't think any scientific invention or technology has been adopted and experimented with so quickly and on such a massive scale as LLMs.
It's crazy that people like you dismiss the tech simply because people want to experiment with it. It's like some of you are against scientific experimentation for some reason.