| ▲ | antonvs 6 hours ago | |
The numbers given in the article are actually consistent with what is usually meant by “everyone” in such statements. Sure, it’s not literally everyone. But it’s a very significant percentage, especially given how quick the adoption has been. | ||
| ▲ | yegg 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
I think what people mean by everyone varies a lot, which is why I wanted to draw attention to more specific numbers. For example, in the Datos data cited[1], on desktop 86% were using traditional search engines >10 visits/month vs. only 21% for AI chat tools. That is indeed a very significant percentage, but more than 4x less than search and (at least I) wouldn't say that ~1/5 is "everyone." [1] https://sparktoro.com/blog/new-research-20-of-americans-use-... | ||
| ▲ | jzemeocala 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
Kinda like how quickly cellphones popped up and changed everything. | ||
| ▲ | tanaykarnik 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
yeah exactly my thoughts. everyone didn't mean literally everyone. and for the ones that are using it (especially the paid subs). the lure is undeniable. | ||