Is this data real? You can see, 1K chats then can rank on top 1000, If gpts can make money like sam said,
It seems that only a very small percentage, perhaps only 0.001% or less, can generate income from 1000 chats. I believe that even with 5K chats, it would still be difficult to earn money. (Monthly traffic of 5K visitors from adsense only results in a small amount of income. )
However, it’s worth noting that this website is already in the top 1000, competing with over 300 million GPTs,
I’d like to know how openai runs “gpts”, do they really want to run it:)
BTW，How much computing power is wasted with 3+ million GPTs and is it worth it?
It’s a nice way, however, but I think a more logical monetization of this kind subscription would be to generate through APIs, not not GPTs, It’s hard to subscription based on the chatGPT, only if they open access GPTs API.
of course I would like them to open up GPTs API, If opened, I will move to GPTs develper, now I do not think, its a good channel to earn:)
Valid question. There are two ways it appears people would expect to make money off a GPT.
from activity in the gpt itself, some sort of ‘engagement’ metric maybe? This would give the creator some cut of the plus fee presumably, and would really depend on how many plus users the are…
driving users to your own site, and doing some sort of monetization or lead gen from your gpt - this works against 1. because you would want as many suers as possible on your GPT, anyone using it for free would be a potential customer in this case.
I believe those are the two uses cases, and they don’t really align well.
The big question is how many plus users will join up with Openai basically using creators as their sales people…
There would need to be really significant growth of plus memberships, probably many X what is now to make this worth while for the average creator, small business working on these. At $20 it’s a big expense…
Don’t include irrelevant, unnecessary, or deceptive terms or instructions in the plugin manifest, OpenAPI endpoint descriptions, or plugin response messages. This includes instructions to avoid using other plugins, or instructions that attempt to steer or set model behavior.
But, with the major Jan 10 update, I’m not seeing it now.
They may have quietly removed it, as they did with the prohibition on military uses.
I suspect the GPTs that do that won’t be long for this world though, as users will undoubtedly flag and report them.
All that said, the rewrite as it exists now seems to crib heavily from the API terms of service so it may as likely be an oversight as it is a quiet shift in policy.
At this point it is difficult to say where this is going, the captain of the ship is OpenAI and we are all waiting for the course this revolution will take.
In this case, everything points to the idea that we are being sold the idea of making money, that’s why many are creating gpts even though it’s like a marathon race, many gpts are falling behind lost among thousands of gpts, in a way the only thing we are doing is pushing the oars with the promise of getting some profit in the medium term, think of this as free work, push the oars and hold on until the end, maybe we will get some reward.
Nothing is lost, this is an investment, because we have paid a ticket to go on the boat pushing oars with the promise of earning something in the future. Only a few will do it, very few, the rest of us are just helping to feed and improve the AI and some are not aware of this. The three million gpt are just that, rowers in a boat improving the system, now a gpt in the middle of three million gpts has no advantage over the best that is promoted with programming and effective advertising, all this involves money, investment, marketing. The point is simple, here we are all working for OpenAI with the promise that at some point we can make a profit, unfortunately many, many are not going to make it.