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

ChatGPT Plus

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#391

Post by kerpotgh »

sterlind wrote: post #244
kerpotgh wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s going to have to be a “labor of love”. Once the model is out there it will be shared and available, but this only works if there’s no company to litigate against and no chance of making money off the thing (other than possibly going the crypto route).

why can't crowdfunding work for this stuff? I'd gladly chip in like, $1K or something, to fund the training of a ChatGPT-like LLM, on the condition that it's publicly released with no fetters.

Seems like you would have to declare an entity to receive funds which is a no-no if you’re setting out to do something illegal.

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#392

Post by tpmx »

tinyhouse wrote: post #110

I feel they are not playing their cards right. Obv ChatGPT is a huge success and more importantly, very useful. But it's clear that soon Google Search will have something similar for users and for free because they display ads. How many people are going to pay $20 for ChatGPT then even if it's slightly better? (for the web interface, not talking about the API) I know they are still making it free for everyone, but th…

Google has this really annoying habit of dumbing down their services sufficiently to make them work with like 80% of the population (guesstimate).

Do you really think Google will create a consumer-facing version of ChatGPT that has the same power and expressibility? I very strongly doubt it. It's not in their DNA.

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#393

Post by epistemer »

cloudking wrote: post #2

$20/month seems more reasonable than the rumored $42 (likely a Hitchhiker's Guide reference) If you are willing to pay for this service, why? What are your use cases?

$20 is completely reasonable to me.

I have come to see it as a brilliant savant friend that loves to tell bullshit stories.

At first , I was hung up on the bullshit stories but the brilliant ideas are so good that I can put up with the bullshit.

I am at the point that if I am thinking about something I want to know what my crazy friend thinks of it too.

A totally moronic use case I have tried is writing one liners about marriage in the style of Rodney Dangerfield.

prompt: Write a one liner about marriage in the style of Dangerfield

"I told my wife she was drawing her eyebrows too high. She looked surprised."

I think it is a stolen joke from the internet but the level of understanding from such sparse language is astounding to me.

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#394

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #304
Kiro wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You underestimate how powerful it already is. Have you tried Copilot or coding with ChatGPT? If this is the very first iteration it won't be long before many developers are fully replaced.

People are seriously in denial about how powerful this is. As you said this is just the beginning

What would you suggest people do, thinking about the 99% of devs who don't make FAANG salaries so that FIRE isn't an option?

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#395

Post by erulabs »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #292
dragonwriter wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it's cheaper than $20/month, Since the $20/month is for priority access to new features and priority access including during high-load times, not API access (a separatr offering not yet available), I don't understand the cost comparison. What you are proposing does not substitute for any part of the $20/month offering over the basic free product.

He's a programmer. They re cheaper than scrooge. They'll write a tool themselves in 6 months rather than spend 10 dollars. Idk why but programmers are the cheapest people on earth in regards to programming tools. I bought Intellij idea for $400 like 12 years ago and got made fun of at work even though it made me substantially faster than eclipse.

This is partly because in English we literally lack the word required. Free is both “gratis” and “libre”. Software should be free, but software does not need to be free.

The lack of distinction on this term plagues the English speaking world in more ways than frugal programmers. See: the entire political spectrum in the US

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#396

Post by popinman322 »

drc500free wrote: post #366

I did a LinkedIn poll last week of what people would pay for ChatGPT Plus. Small N and limited to my social network, but I think it shows that $20 isn't the right final price and code generation isn't the best use case: ChatGPT is exploring a paid model. What's the most that would you/your employer would be willing to pay per user for a ChatGPT subscription? It's fun, but not worth money 14 (35%) What's interesting i…

As a mid-level dev, I remember putting $40/month in the survey OpenAI sent out. Granted, I kind of also expected API access for that price.

It's a very interesting multi-tool; being able to write first drafts for docs, summarize notes, and quickly consult the model about technical decisions is very nice. All of the answers need to be checked of course, but you'd normally need to do a second pass anyway.

I do worry about privacy in a work context. Presumably with the paid plan we get to limit the use of our data for training? If you can't discuss work topics with the bot then it immediately drops in value to <$20/month.

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#397

Post by wongarsu »

popol12 wrote: post #373
drc500free wrote: post #366

I did a LinkedIn poll last week of what people would pay for ChatGPT Plus. Small N and limited to my social network, but I think it shows that $20 isn't the right final price and code generation isn't the best use case: ChatGPT is exploring a paid model. What's the most that would you/your employer would be willing to pay per user for a ChatGPT subscription? It's fun, but not worth money 14 (35%) What's interesting i…

Or they just have higher income and can afford to pay that much

Yeah, it might just be that everyone is valueing it at 0.5h of salary.

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#398

Post by rngname22 »

zenlikethat wrote: post #82
protonbob wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that they actually want to shape the narrative to "safe" content that they approve of. It's disguised moral and political activism.

Are there actual examples of this or is this just rage bait? Usually it just avoids treading on controversial issues. I don't see why people get so mad about the libruls pushing their agenda through ChatGPT when it simply avoids topics it deems too controversial or harmful, like vaccine misinformation or Trump.

Do you not understand that what is considered controversial, offensive, or misinformation is not consistent/universal among all people? It seems incredibly straightforward that if you disagree with OpenAI's stances on what does and does not constitute those things ^ then you'd be mad.

Re: ChatGPT Plus

#400

Post by raldi »

sireat wrote: post #362
raldi wrote: post #147

I've been using the GPT-3 playground for a few months, and it seems more powerful and a lot cheaper (at least for my moderate usage). You can still have a conversation with it just by appending new prompts to the bottom. For those willing to pay $20 for ChatGPT+, could you share your rationale for choosing it over the above?

Difference is that with GPT-3 playground you need to know your prompt engineering a bit. You need to worry about hyperparameters (temperature etc). With ChatGPT you have none of that complexity. All the fine tuning choices are made for you. That is a huge advantage to general populace. If there is a guide to get EXACT results that ChatGPT gives you on the OPEN AI playground I'd be interested in seeing those settings.

99% of the time, I leave all the parameters set to defaults. The other 1% was just experimentation. It wouldn't have diminished my experience one iota if I'd never touched the parameters at all.
Post reply on HN