> That is a such a wild claim. People like the output of LLMs so much that ChatGPT is the fastest growing app ever.
And this kind of meaningless factoid was immediately usurped by the Threads app release, which IMO is kind of a pointless app. Maybe let's find a more meaningful metric before saying someone else's claim is wild.
Asking your Instagram Users to hop on to your ready made TikTok Clone is hardly in the same sphere as spinning up that much users from nothing.
And while Threads growth and usage stalled, ChatGPT is very much still growing and has *far* more monthly visits than threads.
There's really nothing meaningless about ChatGPT being the 5th most visited site on the planet, not even 3 years after release. Threads doesn't make the top 50.
What basic context is being ignored? Here's how the thread has gone:
"chatGPT has the fastest growing userbase in history which shows users really like the output!"
This unsourced (and wrong) claim was offered in rebuttal to another post saying people don't like the output of LLM's. This rebuttal offers DAU/MAU as a metric of how much people like the app, I presume, and thus the output of the app. Besides that being a wild jump on its own, it's incorrect. As I pointed out - threads almost immediately beat that DAU/MAU record, and I'd offer a claim it hasn't exactly been a tremendous success either in popularity or monetarily. Pointing out that they got that DAU/MAU by registering their own users to it is precisely the point that is being made - this metric is a meaningless gauge of how popular an app is, and especially when viewed from the context of this argument, which is whether the popularity of the app (as it relates to DAU/MAU growth) also suggests people love consuming the output of it.
No offense, but are you sure you're following this conversation?
>Pointing out that they got that DAU/MAU by registering their own users to it is precisely the point that is being made - this metric is a meaningless gauge of how popular an app is, and especially when viewed from the context of this argument.
How does that make DAU/MAU growth meaningless ? Threads has special context. That's it. Almost all the other software applications that orbited that record are staples of internet life today. So because one entry had some special circumstances to take into account (that users weren't gained from scratch), the growth as a concept or comparison (for uses gained from scratch) is meaningless ? How does that make any sense ?
Also, yeah strong adoption (which is the real point here beyond just the growth) is a strong signal for satisfaction. It's very strange to claim most people don't like the output of what has half a billion weekly active users and is one of the most visited sites on the planet.
>Besides that being a wild jump on its own, it's incorrect.
It's not incorrect. Threads was the fastest to hit some early milestones (like 100M) sure but since growth stalled, ChatGPT is still the software application with the fastest adoption because it reached further milestones threads hasn't and may not reach.
And this kind of meaningless factoid was immediately usurped by the Threads app release, which IMO is kind of a pointless app. Maybe let's find a more meaningful metric before saying someone else's claim is wild.