Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
AI Chrome

ChatGPT's Monthly Usage May Now Rival Google Chrome (digitaltrends.com) 54

Posted by EditorDavid from the user-interfacing dept.
An anonymous reader shared this report from Digital Trends: A number of popular generative AI platforms are seeing consistent growth as users are figuring out how they want to use the tools - and ChatGPT is at the top of the list with the most visits, at 3.7 billion worldwide. So many people are visiting the AI chatbot, its figures are rivaling browser market share. It can only be compared to Google Chrome figures in terms of monthly users, which is estimated to be around 3.45 billion.

Statistics from [web analytics company] Similarweb indicate that ChatGPT saw a 17.2% month-over-month (MoM) growth and a 115.9% year-over-year (YoY) traffic growth... Google's Chrome browser has a solid market share of 35.4 billion users in 2024. It has seen minimal growth YoY but has grown 45.35% in the last 5 years, according to Statscounter.
The article notes ChatGPT saw a jump in traffic when it changed its dowmain from chat.openai.com to just chatgpt.com -- and that OpenAI recently purchased the domain Chat.com (though "there is no word on what the company plans to do...") Meanwhile, other AI tools continue to see traffic and growth, despite not being at the same level as ChatGPT. Despite recent plagiarism claims, the Perplexity chatbot has seen 90.8 million visits in October, a 25.5% MoM growth and 199.2% YoY growth. Google's Gemini Chatbot saw 291.6 million visits in October, a 6.2% MoM growth and 19% YoY growth after the company introduced a new ChromeOS update that brought new AI features to its Chromebooks. Anthropic's Claude chatbot has seen 84.1 million visits in October, a 25.5% MoM growth and 394.9% YoY growth, after recently rolling out a desktop application for Windows and macOS. Microsoft's web-based Copilot website saw 69.4 million visits in October, an 87.6% MoM growth.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ChatGPT's Monthly Usage May Now Rival Google Chrome More

ChatGPT's Monthly Usage May Now Rival Google Chrome

Comments Filter:

  • Sounds like a an ai hallucination to me

    • Article was probably written by AI, not factoring in what a browser is?

  • Are they really just conflating visits and users? (Score:3)

    by thecombatwombat ( 571826 ) on Saturday November 09, 2024 @03:40PM (#64933603)

    It seems really blatant, they are saying the number of "visits" to ChatGPT, is for some reason comparable to the number of *users* of Google Chrome?

    That's . . . why? Yeah, GPT use is growing, but that's a silly headline grab, people are not using ChatGPT as much as they use their web browser, it's still not even close.

    Also, how did this sentence about 35.4 billion users get past any kind of editor at all? It . . . does literally say that.

    "Googleâ(TM)s Chrome browser has a solid market share of 35.4 billion users in 2024"

    • Guess I should stop visiting this advertising vehicle. I used to think it was a news site.

    • Re:Are they really just conflating visits and user (Score:4, Interesting)

      by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Saturday November 09, 2024 @05:45PM (#64933813)

      It seems really blatant, they are saying the number of "visits" to ChatGPT, is for some reason comparable to the number of *users* of Google Chrome?

      People use Google Chrome. It’s an actual tool. Not just a search engine. No one is “visiting” Chrome. Those are users.

      People use ChatGPT. No one “visits” chatgpt.com because there’s basically nothing there. Except the tool. The tool they use. Those are also users.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Also, how did this sentence about 35.4 billion users get past any kind of editor at all? It . . . does literally say that.

      I guess both the "writer" and the "editor" are ChatAI and share a hallucination there. A sign of the "quality" of reporting to come...

      • I am on a audio forum and someone posted the following Q to chat. Hilarious response. Talk about hallucination.

        Here is what I asked it about what sounds better with Heresy.

        As you see the enlighten expert details, since computers can give honest opinions with their ears and experience.

        Question =

        "What sounds better through a Klipsch Heresy? A warm potato amplifier with ionic reverse cucumber. Or a Crisp clear sliced tomato with 96 deep rich 9 volt batteries forced into them"

        Answer =

        A warm pota

    • World population has grown significantly since the Beta Orionis treaty at the Cassiopia league a few years back. The portals were opened, and aliens have rushed through. We think a lot of them are just seasonal workers, but they still show up in the Chrome numbers. Some people think we need to close the asylum loophole, but since the XO-5 settlement wars are ongoing, there are a lot of legitimate refugees who need help and no one wants to turn their back on them.

      This is the universe we live in, and Chrom

    • I use chatgpt more than I use google. Google has become increasingly useless. It hasn't been finding easy correct information and has been feeding me obvious ads or manipulated sites instead.

      Right now-- AI isn't corrupted yet. It will hallucinate if the "temperature" setting is too extreme but it is generally fast and accurate with facts.

      • Google is increasingly useless. You're not wrong.
        But ChatGPT is also very often wrong. The idea that it is "generally fast and accurate with facts" is a falsehood that you have led yourself to believe.
        It's "average" accuracy is found to be ~88%, but domain-specific accuracy falls as low as 60%.

        I recommend finding yourself a better search engine.

        • No, it's an observation based on validating the responses I've been getting from 4o.

          You can't *trust* it and must do some validation... but it's validity rate is very high now.

          • You can't *trust* it and must do some validation... but it's validity rate is very high now.

            No, it's not.
            The numbers I gave are real numbers calculated via standardized testing.
            Something that is wrong 12% of the time on average, or 40% of the time when you ask it a direct question about a specific topic is not "very high".

  • "Visits to a web page vs monthly users of a browser".

  • How Can that Be Right (Score:4, Informative)

    by PocketPick ( 798123 ) on Saturday November 09, 2024 @03:56PM (#64933631)

    In comparison, Google’s Chrome browser has a solid market share of 35.4 billion users in 2024

    How in the world (literally) can there be 35.4 billion users, when there are only 7.5-8 billion humans on the planet?

  • introducing "muth", it's like maths, but for the most outrageous clickbait possible. Even the most tenuous link to reality is enough with muth!
  • How is this possible? There are only 8.2 billion people in the World!

  • It is a very useful tool. Quick translation? Idea for a new homework assignment? Random question, just because? Check an important email? Reminder how to use a specific API call?

    Granted, not always ChatGPT. Mixtral:8x7b is great for local use. But: if you aren't using these tools, you ate missing something truly revolutionary.

    • Why do all those examples of something "truly revolutionary" sound so crushingly banal? I'm not disputing the new means potentially being an improvement over the older methods(in particular machine translation seems notably less bad that it used to be); but when the examples are 'searches you might have done two decades or more ago' and 'check email' it's a little hard to detect the revolution.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Why do all those examples of something "truly revolutionary" sound so crushingly banal?

        Because that is all ChatAI can do. It cannot do anything that needs the slightest bit of insight and it cannot do anything a bit more special. Oh, and it cannot deal with border-conditions or slightly nin- standard circumstances.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      And every time you use it, you become a tiny bit dumber. Sure, if you use it sparingly and make sure to exercise your mental skills, you can compensate that effect. But are you doing that?

      So yes, "revolutionary", but not in a positive sense.

    • I've merged large reports together that probably would have taken me a day or two in about an hour. That's fucking revolutionary.

  • Idiocracy is apparently really near... (Score:3)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Saturday November 09, 2024 @05:35PM (#64933783)

    Because while convenient, chat-AI is not very good and those that actually need it are not very smart. I am not opposed to some occasional use, but use it all the time and you get dumber. Oh, and still no major applications in sight.

    One achievement though: ChatAI makes it _harder_ to learn coding. I have observed this and have had multiple conversations with students regarding this effect. They all observed something similar. The problem is that it is now harder to force yourself to learn the simple things. And if you do not learn the simple things, you will never master the slightly more advanced ones.

    This is actually an advantage: The gap between competent and incompetent coders gets larger. You can now very easily identify the incompetent wannabee coders because they cannot code anything without that crutch. Well, to be fair, that already worked to a degree before: https://blog.codinghorror.com/... [codinghorror.com]

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Also, "hammers/pocket calculators/search engines/spreadsheets are not very good and those that actually need them are not very smart"

      Guess what? It's a tool. Can you live without it? Sure. But being dogmatically opposed to new tools is the dictionary definition of "Luddite". You can be aware of the limitations of LLMs, whilst benefitting from things it does very well. If you don't know what those things are, maybeperhaps try putting aside your dislike of LLMs and doing some research. Or perhaps you're not q

    • I'm a minecraft modder with almost 60 million downloads for dozens of mods.

      I used chatgpt 4o to write a new feature for my existing mod on Monday. It was *much* *much* faster than doing it manually. It was roughly 95% error free too. I estimate that Chatgpt4o improves my coding speed for new areas of the code by about 3x (300%).

      And since I have mods from versions 1.12.2 to 1.21.1, it's really handy for writing code for the same algorithm over the 5 different code bases.

      Sure.. I *could* manually dig th

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        And if you make sure to keep your skills up, that is perfectly fine. From the sample of students I have, about 20% take learning the language still serious when they have ChatGPT, the rest fails to acquire good skills.

        The other thing is that free ChatAI may well go away and you are making yourself dependent on a tool there. And the third thing is, at some point it may well stagnate, because it requires new human-written code to update its training. If too many people use AI to write their code, that will no

        • Dude... I have been programming in Vax assembly language, ada, C, C++, Java, RPG, Basic, 6502 assembly language, Objective C, and other languages since 1976. I have a degree in COSC and worked in the field for 31 years before retiring at 51.

          I've continued to program since then and my skills are just fine.

          What I don't have is an encyclopedic knowledge of the minecraft code base... for *every* version... for *every* modloader.

          NO ONE does.

          Your statement is disconnected from reality.

  • Also Bottled Water's Monthly Usage May Now Rival Netflix

  • There are no ads, no malware links, and no junkware store recommendations pushing cheap knock offs.

  • It's increasingly difficult to get a good answer out of Google. Formerly reliable Google Fu technique's no longer work. The first page of results is rife with advertisements and manipulated results.

    ChatGpt gets me the information I want quickly. Then it's a simple matter to verify that information (and 4o is usually accurate about historical facts and other factual material- it's weak with weird edge cases like "write a 17 syllable poem that is not a Haiku" (hint: It will write a Haiku-even explicit dire

    • and 4o is usually accurate about historical facts and other factual material

      No, it's not.
      There are a lot of things it is really great at. Machine translation as you mentioned. Asking for boilerplates.

      Asking it for facts is a good way to pollute your brain with wrong answers that you're emotionally tied to.
      Stop fucking doing it. We don't need any more stupid people.

      • Sorry but my experience says you are wrong.

        From questions about the ductility and malleability of various metals and their melting points, to historical, to biblical verses, to generating coding the result stand up to verification.

        Google on the other hand is nearly worthless. It's been corrupted too much. It misdirects too much.

        • Sorry but my experience says you are wrong.

          And actual objective tests say you are.
          When someone's perception of reality differs from what can be measured, what do we call it?

          From questions about the ductility and malleability of various metals and their melting points, to historical, to biblical verses, to generating coding the result stand up to verification.

          Acting it about facts regarding metals is a good way to be misinformed, and to think you weren't.
          Studes like "ChatGPT Convincingly Explains Organic Chemistry Reaction Mechanisms Slightly Inaccurately with High Levels of Explanation Sophistication" are too numerous to count.
          And while you might say, "slightly inaccurately" doesn't sound so bad- but it is when you're basing your

  • ChatGPT still speaks with forked tongue. As in, it just makes quotes up and makes up who said them.

  • Another rich target missed by Slashdot...

Slashdot Top Deals

"You're a creature of the night, Michael. Wait'll Mom hears about this." -- from the movie "The Lost Boys"

Close