zlacker

>>LucidL+(OP)
My anxiety about falling behind with AI plummeted after I realized many of these tweets are overblown in this way. I use AI every day, how is everyone getting more spectacular results than me? Turns out: they exaggerate.

Here are several real stories I dug into:

"My brick-and-mortar business wouldn't even exist without AI" --> meant they used Claude to help them search for lawyers in their local area and summarize permits they needed

"I'm now doing the work of 10 product managers" --> actually meant they create draft PRD's. Did not mention firing 10 PMs

"I launched an entire product line this weekend" --> meant they created a website with a sign up, and it shows them a single javascript page, no customers

"I wrote a novel while I made coffee this morning" --> used a ChatGPT agent to make a messy mediocre PDF

>>pizzat+ua
Getting viral on X is the current replacement for selling courses for {daytrading,amazon FBA,crypto}.

The content of the tweets isn't the thing.. bull-posting or invoking Cunningham's Law is. X is the destination for formula posting and some of those blue checkmarks are getting "reach" rev share kickbacks.

>>browni+Sb
Yeah, if you get enough impressions, you get some revenue, so you don't need to sell any courses, just viral content. Which is why some (not ALL) exaggerate as suggested.

>>gianca+1k
It's a bit insane how much reach you need before you'd earn anything impactful, though.

I average 1-2M impressions/month, and have some video clips on X/Twitter that have gotten 100K+ views, and average earnings of around $42/month (over the past year).

I imagine you'd need hundreds of millions of impressions/views on Twitter to earn a living with their current rates.

>>geerli+0o
Thanks a lot for your transparency Jeff! Much needed in this area. And your content is quality, much unlike what else being discussed here.

It is really hard to actually make anything substantial on social media exposure. Unfortunately this does not stop many from exaggerating claims in order to (maybe become) be internet famous, or seeing high number of clicks etc. So it is both bad business for creators, and poisoning the discourse for readers - the only real winners are the social media companies and the product companies that get hyped up.

>>jonono+IS1
> Unfortunately this does not stop many from exaggerating claims in order to (maybe become) be internet famous

I've been thinking about this a lot lately in another context -- vira priests being anti-vax and realized it's the other way around: their motivation doesn't matter, but the viewers don't want to see moderate content, they want to see highly polarized and controversial topics.

The same with the claims about AI. Nobody wants to hear AI boosts productivity in nuanced way, people either want to hear about 10X or -10X so the market dictates the content/meme.