Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

help.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 205 posts

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#191

Post by akiselev »

mattnewton wrote: post #145
shard wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That reminds of the sign "Buy one, get one". Does that mean you pay for an item and you get that item, or you pay for an item and you get another item for free? I expect the meaning to the be the second one, but my brain parses it to be the first one.

That’s because it they have left off the word “free” - it’s just an odd shortening of the less ambiguous “buy one get one free”, probably made by someone who is very familiar with seeing “buy one get one free”

It not really all that odd in retail. “BOGO” (pronounced bo-go) is quick to say on the floor and is less awkward than “BOGOF” which sounds like either a franken-portmanteau of “beef” and “stroganof [sic]” or an amateur spy’s attempt at a cover identity.

It’s also used more generally for buy one get one X% off sales and you’ll see lots of “BOGO50” promo/coupon codes. Then marketing jumped on the bandwagon and started plastering “BOGO” all over marketing material so consumers are used to the lingo now

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#192

Post by Oranguru »

learndeeply wrote: post #162
arbol wrote: post #5

Any chance of this making GitHub copilot cheaper?

Out of curiosity, is $10/month prohibitively expensive for you or other developers? Copilot is free for open source developers and students.

It is not prohibitively expensive for me but it is a bit more than I would like to pay for such a tool. I hope that prices come down over time. Also, it is free for open source project developers and students but not for teachers and researchers, that is a little bit surprising to me.

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#193

Post by M3L0NM4N »

lukev wrote: post #188
ComplexSystems wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this was interesting so I literally pasted the entire thing into OpenAI's playground and asked DaVinci to write a rebuttal of your argument. Here is what it said: --- There are a few problems with LukeV's argument. First, he conflates the ability to generate human-like text with the ability to communicate. Just because GPT-3 can generate text that sounds like it was written by a human does not mean that it…

> For example, GPT-3 has been used to generate essays on complex topics such as the philosophy of mind, and these essays have been well-received by readers. That's the other problem with GPT-3... it will happily say things that are absolutely false :) I think this response actually illustrates my point quite nicely; it is a plausible sounding rebuttal but does not actually engage on a logical level. That said, I don'…

Lol, that last point about undergraduate papers is exactly what I was thinking reading your initial statement. As a current student, it feels that sometimes we're forced to just generate something that looks plausibly like an argument as opposed to actually generating one.

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#194

Post by londons_explore »

thdxr wrote: post #161
londons_explore wrote: post #83

I'm really surprised they don't charge a very high price with a generous free tier, and then have an army of salespeople who will offer you whatever discount is necessary to make your business model work. If you want to use GPT-3 to build an AI-lawyer, it'll be very expensive... but to build a tool for customer support for walmart will be cheap, etc.

making things cheap encourages experimentation and paradoxically increases total spend

hence the generous free tier. You want it to be big enough for a team of developers to do all the experimentation and development work, and also to launch a product to a small audience.

As soon as your product is a success, you run out of free tier, and you will have to negotiate a price with the sales team.

If I were OpenAI, then while I had a market leading product, the price would be 'I want half the profit margin of whatever you're using it for'.

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#195

Post by scottmf »

blagie wrote: post #168
dr_dshiv wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s incredibly good at generating scholarly text. Put in a title and abstract and it will come up with a strong intro that is clear and compelling. It helps me write academic papers more clearly, as a result. Also, great for early stages of grant writing or proposals. It came up with a fantastic conference proposal for me that I spent 20 minutes editing and then just sent, unedited. It will aid speechwriters or help…

I've started asking GPT-3 for relationship advice. It's often... insightful. There is a bit of prompt engineering. If you start your question with things like "As a qualified therapist, what would you recommend to" .... There is also a bit of engineering with the question. I often ask about an analogous situation, rather than my own. I'm not batting 100%, but I often get strategies and things to think about I wouldn'…

You can use GPT-3 for relationship advice, but should you?

Could you elaborate a little more on what you're asking? Perhaps an example?

I feel as if any use case like this, — particularly if it crosses into interpersonal relationships and disagreement — risks being incredibly dangerous as far as reinforcing your own biases.

It should go without saying that to even consider this, you should have a solid grasp of the fundamentals of these LLMs, their limitations and inherent biases, and their tendency to unconditionally agree with you regardless of your position – particularly in a dialog-style format.

One clearly problematic use case would be asking about an interpersonal conflict where there exists an established societal and cultural power imbalance.

E.g., describing a disagreement between a man and a woman and asking for insight into that conversation would be incredibly flawed, no matter how objectively it were depicted.

This isn't an attack on you nor am I claiming you're doing anything at this level, but taken to the extreme it’s something I can easily imagine someone doing after reading your post.

I’d really just like people to be cautious. After all, this is the same language model that told me a social media post contains hate speech due to “negative sentiment towards a protected class (racists)”.

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#196

Post by scottmf »

lukev wrote: post #188
ComplexSystems wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this was interesting so I literally pasted the entire thing into OpenAI's playground and asked DaVinci to write a rebuttal of your argument. Here is what it said: --- There are a few problems with LukeV's argument. First, he conflates the ability to generate human-like text with the ability to communicate. Just because GPT-3 can generate text that sounds like it was written by a human does not mean that it…

> For example, GPT-3 has been used to generate essays on complex topics such as the philosophy of mind, and these essays have been well-received by readers. That's the other problem with GPT-3... it will happily say things that are absolutely false :) I think this response actually illustrates my point quite nicely; it is a plausible sounding rebuttal but does not actually engage on a logical level. That said, I don'…

> I think this response actually illustrates my point quite nicely

Absolutely. From a surface-level read it may sound sensible but it all falls apart very easily.

The lines of reasoning for each attempted rebuttal are practically non sequiturs.

Out of curiosity, I’d be interested in seeing some attempts using prompts intended to induce CoT reasoning (“let’s think step-by-step“ etc.)

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#197

Post by scottmf »

M3L0NM4N wrote: post #193
lukev wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, GPT-3 has been used to generate essays on complex topics such as the philosophy of mind, and these essays have been well-received by readers. That's the other problem with GPT-3... it will happily say things that are absolutely false :) I think this response actually illustrates my point quite nicely; it is a plausible sounding rebuttal but does not actually engage on a logical level. That said, I don'…

Lol, that last point about undergraduate papers is exactly what I was thinking reading your initial statement. As a current student, it feels that sometimes we're forced to just generate something that looks plausibly like an argument as opposed to actually generating one.

Well, it was trained on a lot of internet comments after all…

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#198

Post by scottmf »

WithinReason wrote: post #177
ComplexSystems wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this was interesting so I literally pasted the entire thing into OpenAI's playground and asked DaVinci to write a rebuttal of your argument. Here is what it said: --- There are a few problems with LukeV's argument. First, he conflates the ability to generate human-like text with the ability to communicate. Just because GPT-3 can generate text that sounds like it was written by a human does not mean that it…

I noticed that when GPT-3 has trouble continuing a sentence or create a difficult argument it relies on filler words to stretch out a sentence until it has no choice but to write something meaningful.

LLMs are great and have many use cases but ultimately they’re just very talented bullshit machines.

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#199

Post by WithinReason »

scottmf wrote: post #198
WithinReason wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed that when GPT-3 has trouble continuing a sentence or create a difficult argument it relies on filler words to stretch out a sentence until it has no choice but to write something meaningful.

LLMs are great and have many use cases but ultimately they’re just very talented bullshit machines.

This is due to the way they were trained: predict the most likely next word. In a difficult context the most likely next word is a filler word.

Re: OpenAI API pricing update FAQ

#200

Post by scottmf »

lukev wrote: post #187
iLoveOncall wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So while GPT-3 is truly remarkable in its ability to generate text, it cannot, by definition, communicate GPT-3 does nothing without a human inputting what it wants it to output. GPT-3 is as much a tool for communication as are sounds, words, symbols, etc. Whether it was carved in stone by a human hand or generated on the cloud by an AI, the intent to communicate is always coming from a human. If you think the text…

So, I actually agree with you there. Crafting a prompt, curating the output, and then distributing it certainly itself an act of communication. I don't particularly like it as an act of communication because the information density is going to be quite low. If you want to tell me something, I'd rather you just told me the prompt! It will have all the relevant "real" communication; anything added by GPT-3 is basically…

I’m not sure I follow. If we’re talking about turning a few sentences into a blog post then sure, but there are many use cases for these models.

E.g., distilling large amounts of text into short summaries while retaining substance is effectively the opposite of this, and is a use case GPT3 has been applied to successfully/commercially.

Post reply on HN