405
ChatGPT's market share slips below 50% for first time (techcrunch.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 4 months ago (11 children)

That depends; it will most likely cause some pretty serious issues outside the AI space. When that bubble finally pops, it'll probably make the dot-com bust look like a bathtub fart. Knock-on effects over non AI industries, and a lot of little bitch CEO's that put all their money/companies money in AI will now be out a whole lot of cash and go on (more) firing sprees.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago* (10 children)

    And if it doesn't pop, it has made ordinary people into millionaires. I was having a look at Swedish Avanza site where they launched a new feature where people can share their portfolios (what stocks they are invested in, and their account growth). The best investors got in early on all this stuff. Nvidia and now memory and disk stocks, so they consistently made tons and tons of money.

    All while people has been waiting for the bubble to pop since... 2021? Maybe earlier.

    We absolutely don't know if it will pop, and even if it does, there was a huge opportunity to make money from it over years and years.

    Thats what investment bankers did, and that's what ordinary people did. Some got very rich on this.

    Im just saying that because it's important to realize that the way we think may not be optimal for our lives sometimes. I understand fear. But I also understand that some risks are necessary to gain something valuable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    Chat GPT came out in 2023. To the extent there was a bubble in 2021 (crypto and EV come to mind) those frothy parts of the market have deflated.

    Thought it was worth adding to your comment that getting rich by taking extraordinary risk may not be "optimal", and that looking at upside outliers is a bad way to decide what to do with personal finances.

    If what you're advocating is buying well diversified, low fee, investments with a long time horizon then carry right on though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

    You can adjust your risk, sure. Those low fee diversified investments will give you index level gains, sure. But I meant getting actual rich. Then you need to bet on the right stocks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    Pfff

    Best way to have a million is starting with 2 million.

    Or write a book about how to get rich. Like that kyosaki guy that blew it up on real estate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

    I've noticed that some people just have some built in resistence to learning about stocks. It keeps them poor and it's almost as they want that. At the same time, some kids learn about stocks in their teens and start getting experience and then they invest through their entire life, seeing their money grow.

    Its interesting see that attitude. Someone put it there. I would highly recommend challenging your views on this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    Say you get 300% gains on your money and consistently put 50% of your money in stocks for 50 years. It still won't make most people rich.

    Retiring comfortably? Sure, you've saved 50% of your salary. But rich? Like, Elon Musk family money in the 90s when no one knew him? Nope.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    I really think 99.99% of people would be super happy to just be rich enough to have a car, a house, and good food. We don't need very much. People just dont want to be poor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Ironically, the solution is similar: eliminate billionaires and the wealth they are hoarding would flow back to everyone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    How would it end up in the hands of the people? Salary slaves paying taxes would pay less? I don't think so. It would be taken by the state and used for weapons (in the USA).

    Or am I missing something?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    War is business to billionaires, one of the best. Most of the money that goes into war doesn't make it into salaries and veteran services, it goes into suppliers. And the biggest suppliers are VERY big, and are run by VERY large corporations.

    War is yet another way of transferring money from everyday people into billionaires pockets. And it's way more effective at doing that than Amazon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent