At this point in the hype cycle, I am completely unimpressed by everyone slapping something on top of GPT and calling it a product. There are at least 4 projects on the front page that do this today. The interesting technology is GPT itself, but these projects just feels like people trying to scoop up attention for themselves using the psychology of the hype cycle. Please HN, enlighten me on why the middle-man approach here is so interesting.
The startup/“entrepreneur” contingent on hacker news generally considers anything that makes money inherently good, aside from extreme immoral cases.
There is a subgroup in there that is especially interested in low effort ways to make money, with the ultimate goal being to scrape off enough of the money flowing around to either live a good life or get rich.
In summary, the middle-man approach is so interesting on hacker news because a significant portion of the readership aspires to be the middle man.
If a player chooses to play a game, You should hate them for perpetuating the game. If a game is so bad as to be worth hating, it is immoral and unethical to play it.
The biggest challenge currently to GPT and LLMs is how to monetize it or get utility from it. It is fascinating but not reliable enough to be tasked with running say, tech support phone-trees. (Not that it has stopped godawful automated phone systems from being made before LLMs.)
