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

171–180 of 214 posts

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#171

Post by wazoox »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #110
dragonwriter wrote: post #22

> This really should not be a surprise, because even the standard-issue ChatGPT can pass the Bar Exam No, it can’t. The two things that together have sometimes gotten misrepresented that way in “game of telephone” presentations are: (1) that when tested on the multiple choice component of the multistate bar exam (not the whole bar exam), it got passing grades in two subjects (evidence and torts), not the whole multip…

That's not even the important point. ChatGPT can't do anything. It exhibits behavior that was already encapsulated into the semantics of language itself. The only behavior ChatGPT has is to generate semantic continuations from its implicit language model. Every other behavior is a feature of language, not of ChatGPT. Even if ChatGPT could exhibit a passing exam, that would be the feature of carefully curated language…

That's not exactly true. What you describe is a Markov chain, not LLM. The LLMs use neural networks to extract information from the language itself, and make decisions based on this stored model. The model is built from the language, not reality, but the model can integrate information that isn't present in the language, but on the meanings that were conveyed by training data.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#172

Post by nullc »

bombcar wrote: post #90
ncphil wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I _might_ be able to teach an AI how to do effective legal research and writing, or even to do pre and post trial discovery, but representing someone at trial? Not without full immunity from malpractice liability. It would be fun to see how an AI handled cross examination of a hostile witness, or dealt with a response to their hearsay objection like, "res gestae!". Still, a sophisticated AI could be a real help…

I have read enough bad lawsuits to believe an AI could be better than most pro se litigants.

Unfortunately, the AI read the pro se litigants too. ;)

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#173

Post by maleldil »

nl wrote: post #57
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.

> Open-source algorithm? No. The publish their algorithms just fine and no one has had issues replicating their work.

Where's the ChatGPT paper?

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#174

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#175

Post by mritchie712 »

RivieraKid wrote: post #165
gateorade wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you start a company that is entirely dependent on a third party’s closed product, over which you have zero control? This just feels immensely risky.

Starting a company is risky. If everyone thinks like you, it creates an opportunity to create a product that doesn't exist. And yes, there's a risk.

Competition and progress on infra will drive the cost down over time. OpenAI won't be the only show in town. It will become like thinking it's a risk to build on AWS.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#176

Post by [deleted] »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #110
dragonwriter wrote: post #22

> This really should not be a surprise, because even the standard-issue ChatGPT can pass the Bar Exam No, it can’t. The two things that together have sometimes gotten misrepresented that way in “game of telephone” presentations are: (1) that when tested on the multiple choice component of the multistate bar exam (not the whole bar exam), it got passing grades in two subjects (evidence and torts), not the whole multip…

That's not even the important point. ChatGPT can't do anything. It exhibits behavior that was already encapsulated into the semantics of language itself. The only behavior ChatGPT has is to generate semantic continuations from its implicit language model. Every other behavior is a feature of language, not of ChatGPT. Even if ChatGPT could exhibit a passing exam, that would be the feature of carefully curated language…

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#177

Post by risyachka »

blibble wrote: post #45

phoning customer support is already painful when there's a human on the end a bot that gives sometimes random answers seems like a particularly cruel form of torture to inflict on your customers

True but many companies won't care much as long as it saves them a few bucks.

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#178

Post by propogandist »

Mistletoe wrote: post #53
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.

This answers the question I’ve had. How do they make money? It was naive to think we could have all this innovation for a penny. Someone has to pay those bills. How does Bing plan to monetize searches that go through their even more advanced ChatGPT? Humans will be repulsed by ads in the middle of their answer from a sentient feeling AI. Numbers I’ve seen is that ChatGPT searches will cost 10x a Google search. How do…

data mining. Microsoft’s bing app is ridden with ad scripts and they’re wanting to scale up rev share for Bing from media buyers

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#179

Post by mike_hearn »

reilly3000 wrote: post #141
l33t233372 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it’s more important that you personally do the work than the work get done.

Tell me a scenario where that is true that isn't from a contrived institution like K-12.

Where the work is 90% of the time possible to do remotely and thus is AI-able, but the employer has the reasonable expectation that if they ask you can actually show up on site somewhere and have full context in verbal conversations as to the work you were "doing".

Re: OpenAI's Foundry leaked pricing says a lot

#180

Post by Jensson »

macrolime wrote: post #160
klabb3 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t virtually all tests and exams designed to minimize ambiguity, make them fair or easy to grade and questions are designed to have a clear correct answer? This is a stark difference to most real-world human activity. Add to the fact that LLMs perform much better on questions with a lot of training data. And also add the hallucinations or more generally: they don’t ask for help or admi…

>And also add the hallucinations or more generally: they don’t ask for help or admit they don’t know, they seem unaware of their own confidence levels. I'm not so sure about that. If ChatGPT says something wrong and I tell it that's not correct, it will often admit its mistake, but if it is unambiguously correct it will typically keep insisting that its right. Not always though, but it does seem to have some idea abo…

Those are based on similar online conversations. If lots people insist they are right in conversations ChatGPT thinks are similar then it will insist it is right, if many give up then it will give up.

ChatGPT has no other way to gauge "confidence" in the outputted text, the computed confidence you get has nothing to do with how truthful the statement is, but how well the text fits given the examples ChatGPT has seen. A person insisting that a wrong statement is right could fit better and then ChatGPT would give that statement high confidence. But still the number computed is 100% unrelated to the tone it responds in.

Post reply on HN