I with you. But maybe there's a line it crosses from feature to critical impediment?

A great example is YouTube in a web browser. My internet is 350 Mbps with 20-40ms latency. Trying to load YouTube in a new browser tab takes a few to several seconds and I'm forced to wait for it to load because the sign in link doesn't show up until the end of the seizure inducing re-render flashes. Safari, no add ons.

I can't believe it takes so long and I think less of Google as a company because of it. Them speeding it up is not a feature in that case. A trillion dollar technology company ought to provide fast as merely baseline. Anything less is them intentionally disregarding their customer.

Stable diffusion is essentially "slow", yet wildly popular so I'm not sure I agree.

Cutting edge supercomputer programs get judged by different standards from basic forms.

And when slow is the only option, people will wait.

Ding ding, you nailed my point.

Weird, because I completely agree with FridgeSeal.

Decent performance is table stakes outside of very special contexts, and software that can't manage it is bad.

Finding an exception doesn't make that stop being true in general.

Speed is always relative, otherwise it's a subjective, and thus less interesting metric (it's slow for you, not for me).

Stable diffusion is not relatively slow, because it has no alternative that is noticeably faster.

It’s fine to take time to crunch output. What needs to be fast is interaction. If it tells you “Hang on I’m working on it” I don’t think anyone minds that as long as you can leave it to cook while doing something else.