“There are indications that consumers have also lost interest.”
Our reading:
There are indications consumers have lost interest in generative AI, with ChatGPT traffic stagnating or declining.
Assessment: Can’t be checked
What happened
Not graded on evidence
Outcome: Can’t be checked
An opinion, a recommendation, or too vague to test. Listed, not scored.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
The speaker says there are 'indications' that consumers have 'lost interest', and points to ChatGPT traffic sitting below its 2023 peak. The wording is hedged and sets no measure or period for losing interest. Scoring only the traffic numbers would swap a narrower check in for his actual inference, which a reviewer flagged as unfair. Scoring the inference would mean choosing a measure of consumer interest for him. Neither is a fair test of his words, so the claim is not scored.
Caveats
- Primary Similarweb figures for January 2024 could not be loaded, so even the cited signs were not verified here.
Evidence (0 items)
Claims like this aren’t scored, so there is no evidence to show.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Observation
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Where we had to interpret
- The sentence is hedged ('there are indications') and makes an inference about consumer interest. It sets no measure or threshold for 'lost interest'.
- One reading would score only whether the cited signs existed (ChatGPT traffic below its May 2023 peak in January 2024). A reviewer found that this swaps a traffic check in for the consumer-interest inference, which the speaker's words do not license.
- Scoring 'lost interest' itself would mean picking a measure (visits, users, app downloads) and a period the speaker did not give.
- So the claim is treated as a hedged inference that cannot be scored true or false.
We don’t grade claims like this. We only check the quote and who said it.
What would settle it
Nothing settles it as written. A restated claim naming a measure (such as Similarweb monthly ChatGPT visits, May 2023 to January 2024) could be tested.
We found 31 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Where's Your Ed At, Subprime Intelligence, paragraph 21.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-28. The post may have been edited after 2024-02-19.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Where's Your Ed At, Subprime Intelligence
There are indications that consumers have also lost interest.
- Where
- paragraph 21
- Published
- 2024-02-19
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Can’t be checked. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.