Top
Best
New

Posted by yegg 9 hours ago

Not everyone is using AI for everything(gabrielweinberg.com)
393 points | 430 commentspage 5
monkaiju 6 hours ago|
As a part of the "don't use won't use" crowd it has been exhausting explaining that we exist lol
kaydub 5 hours ago||
I'd honestly argue we're actually going the complete opposite direction.

Everybody is using LLMs/AI. All the time. It's in every facet of your life. Just because you didn't input the prompt, doesn't mean you're not consuming the end product of LLMs all day, everyday, on websites like this one, reddit, tiktok, instagram, facebook, etc.

Addressing the article, if you're hyperfocused on whether people are using AI and only consider AI use a chatbot... well, you're not honestly covering all the AI use out there. And reading the other stats, it seems like this article is trying to paint a narrative. Why is the Datos stat only considering "Desktop use" for instance.

Not to mention their stats are actually astounding and DON'T show what the headline is trying to assert. 1/3 of people using AI regularly is a FUCK TON of people in a VERY short span of time to uptake a new technology.

kylehotchkiss 7 hours ago||
I am using AI to take on a fun large scale analysis of churches in USA.

I also just bought a completely mechanical film camera to learn a new old skill with no tech to fall back on.

jstummbillig 6 hours ago||
I disagree. Everyone will be using AI for everything, but, increasingly, people won't think about whether they are using "AI" – just like they don't think about using databases.

Nor should they! It's such a shit thing to be emotionally invested in. Imagine people would have been upset about databases. It's really fantastic software and we should be happy to have it, and now go and make the most of it, for all of us.

arisAlexis 8 hours ago||
Articles that start with no are inherently biased and only gather reads from people that agree.
antonvs 9 hours ago||
The numbers given in the article are actually consistent with what is usually meant by “everyone” in such statements. Sure, it’s not literally everyone. But it’s a very significant percentage, especially given how quick the adoption has been.
yegg 8 hours ago||
I think what people mean by everyone varies a lot, which is why I wanted to draw attention to more specific numbers. For example, in the Datos data cited[1], on desktop 86% were using traditional search engines >10 visits/month vs. only 21% for AI chat tools. That is indeed a very significant percentage, but more than 4x less than search and (at least I) wouldn't say that ~1/5 is "everyone."

[1] https://sparktoro.com/blog/new-research-20-of-americans-use-...

antonvs 1 hour ago||
The numbers are interesting, I agree, as is the overall post.

And as a clickbait headline, "not everyone" makes sense.

But, realistically, the NYT obviously isn't talking about, say, the North Sentinelese islanders. Similarly, it's probably not really talking about people who don't do the kind of white collar work where AI is, so far, most prevalent.

In fact, the group the NYT is most likely referring to as "everyone" is really "readers of the NYT". It might be hard to come up with numbers for that, but I suspect they'd be a lot higher.

Anecdotally, at the company I'm at (late-stage venture-backed), everyone from software developers to people on the marketing, sales, and finance side are using AI. And we're not unique. This will make the statement ring true to many people, even if it's not globally true in an absolute sense.

This all makes more sense once you've truly internalized the Yogi Berra quote about a certain popular restaurant: "No one goes there anymore. It's too crowded."

jzemeocala 8 hours ago|||
Kinda like how quickly cellphones popped up and changed everything.
tanaykarnik 8 hours ago||
yeah exactly my thoughts. everyone didn't mean literally everyone.

and for the ones that are using it (especially the paid subs). the lure is undeniable.

panzi 8 hours ago||
or for anything
nutjob2 8 hours ago||
> AI has gotten so good

Actually anything that is about 90% great and 10% disastrously wrong is utter crap given the way people want and do use AI models.

They are great tools in the right hands and awful in the wrong.

acc_297 8 hours ago|
It's funny lately I've been seeing the cursor advertisements all with some premise of regular young person wants to develop an app and the ads really do focus on the simplest of premises: the only ones I've seen in these skits are essentially variants on the "todo app" web app tutorial

the tech is pretty good at helping identify simple bugs when they happen and to write short sections of code given very explicit instructions but yeah I have yet to see good examples of short one sentence ideas turned into a working product that looks better than anything that could be a UDemy tutorial app.

inigyou 2 hours ago||
I keep saying it hasn't gotten smarter, just memorized more things
dismalaf 8 hours ago||
I honestly just use it as a search engine to get around SEO garbage and ads.

My wife uses it for a (non-computer related) business though and it's great for all sorts of normally tedious marketing/social media type jobs though. Stuff that doesn't really require accuracy just needs text on pictures that looks good quickly.

I think everyone just has FOMO and doesn't want to lose to competitors. Eventually it'll die down.

willmadden 7 hours ago|
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."
More comments...