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

OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

cognitiverevolution.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 214 posts

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#11

Post by Tepix »

seydor wrote: post #2

It looks like OpenAI's first mover advantage won't last long, considering the speed at which these models are improving and compacting themselves. Seems like this new 'Moore's law' will be even more steep, at least in the beginning . So steep, that we can hope to be running these in our desktops instead of on someone else's computer.

I don't think Moore's law is the most important factor, instead algorithmic improvements will enable to have smaller models that are as capable as these humongeous models.

Llama 65b is hopefully just the beginning of this trend. It outperforms OPT-175b.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#12

Post by tikkun »

ilaksh wrote: post #7

The Foundry pricing, $78,000 for a few months minimum, is absolutely the opposite of Open. It could completely kill my small startup if the API goes from less than a penny per request to requiring a huge up-front investment. It means that anyone bootstrapping is now locked out.

They only require an up front payment if you're renting a dedicated instance.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#13

Post by buildbot »

mc32 wrote: post #9

With reports[1] (maybe exaggerated, maybe apocryphal) of companies replacing FTEs with chatGPT, even at these high prices, it may make sense in some use cases, no, tho presumably this kills the playpen use cases. [1] https://it.slashdot.org/story/23/02/27/009234/survey-claims-...

Nobody is doing this, unless you have a source you would like to link?

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#14

Post by Nifty3929 »

ilaksh wrote: post #7

The Foundry pricing, $78,000 for a few months minimum, is absolutely the opposite of Open. It could completely kill my small startup if the API goes from less than a penny per request to requiring a huge up-front investment. It means that anyone bootstrapping is now locked out.

$78k is very small, even for bootstrapped companies. Only the very smallest shops would be inhibited by that. And I admit, that's a lot of them! I get it. It sucks to be a solo developer who wants to get involved and doesn't want to spend a bunch of cash.

But still, for even small players $250k annually just isn't that much.

What we might hope for are trimmed down, subsidized options for small shops who want to get started, with the hope to upgrade them to the full option when they are ready.

In the meanwhile, you might consider partnering up with other small startups.

Also, "open" doesn't mean free. Things take a lot of effort to build and maintain, and that effort needs to be accounted for somewhere.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#15

Post by buildbot »

Tepix wrote: post #11
seydor wrote: post #2

It looks like OpenAI's first mover advantage won't last long, considering the speed at which these models are improving and compacting themselves. Seems like this new 'Moore's law' will be even more steep, at least in the beginning . So steep, that we can hope to be running these in our desktops instead of on someone else's computer.

I don't think Moore's law is the most important factor, instead algorithmic improvements will enable to have smaller models that are as capable as these humongeous models. Llama 65b is hopefully just the beginning of this trend. It outperforms OPT-175b.

That holds true if scaling laws don’t hold true, otherwise a hypothetical Llama 175b would be even better. So the high end will always be on big clusters.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#16

Post by eindiran »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #14
ilaksh wrote: post #7

The Foundry pricing, $78,000 for a few months minimum, is absolutely the opposite of Open. It could completely kill my small startup if the API goes from less than a penny per request to requiring a huge up-front investment. It means that anyone bootstrapping is now locked out.

$78k is very small, even for bootstrapped companies. Only the very smallest shops would be inhibited by that. And I admit, that's a lot of them! I get it. It sucks to be a solo developer who wants to get involved and doesn't want to spend a bunch of cash. But still, for even small players $250k annually just isn't that much. What we might hope for are trimmed down, subsidized options for small shops who want to get s…

> "open" doesn't mean free

Yeah but none of the other definitions of "open" apply to OpenAI either.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#18

Post by celestialcheese »

buildbot wrote: post #13
mc32 wrote: post #9

With reports[1] (maybe exaggerated, maybe apocryphal) of companies replacing FTEs with chatGPT, even at these high prices, it may make sense in some use cases, no, tho presumably this kills the playpen use cases. [1] https://it.slashdot.org/story/23/02/27/009234/survey-claims-...

Nobody is doing this, unless you have a source you would like to link?

Here's one anecdotal source confirming this - specifically some copywriting contractors. Significantly less hours needed per month writing. A lot more hours for our editors but it's still significant cost savings when netted out.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#19

Post by rnd0 »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #17

So much for "Open" AI. Open-source algorithm? No. Open access for free, or reasonable prices? No. Open emails and conversations of directors (accountability)? No. Open conversations of issues and ethics? No.

Thank fuck they weren't called "HomelandAI" or "LibertyAI" or somesuch!

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#20

Post by honkler »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #17

So much for "Open" AI. Open-source algorithm? No. Open access for free, or reasonable prices? No. Open emails and conversations of directors (accountability)? No. Open conversations of issues and ethics? No.

well atleast now they are Open about their intentions

:)

Post reply on HN