First you moved the goalposts by pivoting from “there’s no want for LLMs” to “okay but how many are paying.” You quietly shifted the entire criteria of “want” from voluntary demand to monetization the second evidence of massive adoption showed up.
When I pointed out that VLC has hundreds of millions of users who also don’t pay, you tossed in the irrelevant “it’s open source by one person” line - which is a complete non sequitur. Development model or monetization status has zero logical bearing on whether 800 million weekly ChatGPT users demonstrate real desire for LLMs.
This is classic bad-faith argumentation: throw in red herrings, change the standard whenever your position weakens, and misrepresent what was actually said to avoid engaging with the actual evidence.
Is chat gpt an open source project run by a single dude that doesn’t care if it makes money?
First you moved the goalposts by pivoting from “there’s no want for LLMs” to “okay but how many are paying.” You quietly shifted the entire criteria of “want” from voluntary demand to monetization the second evidence of massive adoption showed up.
When I pointed out that VLC has hundreds of millions of users who also don’t pay, you tossed in the irrelevant “it’s open source by one person” line - which is a complete non sequitur. Development model or monetization status has zero logical bearing on whether 800 million weekly ChatGPT users demonstrate real desire for LLMs.
This is classic bad-faith argumentation: throw in red herrings, change the standard whenever your position weakens, and misrepresent what was actually said to avoid engaging with the actual evidence.
Removed by mod