141–150 of 341 posts
they mentioned revenue sharing in the keynote, and I'm eager to find out how that is going to work. There isn't much money in the $20/month subscription to go around to very many other developers
We can see this playing out with the plug-in store. Full of low value and cursory tools.
Additionally, why would you want to pigeonhole yourself when it comes to ability, control and revenue?
Maybe I'm missing something but, in my opinion, for great value to come out of this greater incentive to build is needed.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I'd guess this is more of an attempt to poach the market of companies like character.ai. The market for models with a distinct character/personality is absolutely massive right now (see: app store rankings) and users are willing to spend insane amounts of money on it (in part because of the "digital girlfriend" appeal).
So these "GPTs" are the combination of predefined prompts and custom API access? Not customly trained LLMs? If so, I guess you can make such a "GPT" on your own server and independent from a specific LLM service by using a prompt like ...you have available an API "WEATHER_API". If you need the weather for a given city for a given day, please say WEATHER_API('berlin', '2022-11-24') and I will give you a new prompt inc…
If you want to be independent for academic/personal reasons, sure you can. If you want reasoning capabilities that Open Source hasn't matched before today, and I'm guessing just got blown out of the water on again today... there's no reason to bother.
Or OpenAI's usage policy limits reasons (either because of your direct use, or because of the potential scope of use you want to support for downstream users of your GPT, etc.) Yes, OpenAI's model is the most powerful around. Yes, it would be foolish not to take advantage of it, if you can, in your custom tools that depend on some LLM. Depending on your use, it may not make sense to be fully and exclusively dependent on OpenAI, though.
Googles: Custom versions of Google. Anyone can easily build their own Google. No coding is required. You can make them for yourself, just for your company’s internal use, or for everyone. Creating one is as easy as starting a conversation, giving it instructions and extra knowledge, and picking what it can do, like searching the web, making images or analyzing data. The whole point of ChatGPT was go to one single pla…
One persona may not give you the answer you're looking for, but another one may. I think maybe they should require the GPTs to have human names though so people intuitively understand that.
Like, Paul can't help me with this task, so let me ask Monica instead.
They could even interact.
"Example GPTs are available today for ChatGPT Plus and Enterprise users to try out including Canva and Zapier AI Actions." and yet as a paying ChatGPT Plus customer, neither the Canva nor the Zapier AI Actions link work for me, I get a "GPT inaccessible or not found" error for Canva or Zapier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need to use an open source LLM for the approach I described. You can still send the prompts to OpenAI's GPT-4 or any other LLM which is available as a service.
What other LLM will compete with GPT-4 Turbo (+ V)? At most you're hedging that Anthropic releases a "Claude 2 Turbo (+ V)": is complicating your setup to such a ridiculous degree vs "zero effort" worth it for that? If things change down the line the fact you invested 5 minutes into writing a prompt isn't going to be such a huge loss anyways, absolutely no reason to roll your own on this.
If things change down the road such that your tool (or a major potential downstream market for your tool) is outside of OpenAI's usage policies, the fact that you invested even a few developer-weeks into combining the existing open source tooling to support running your workload either against OpenAI's models or a toolchain consisting of one or more open source models (including a multimodal toolchain tied into image generation models, if that's your thing) with RAG, etc., is going to be a win.
If it doesn't, maybe its a wasted-effort loss, but there's lots of other ways it could be a win, too.
I'm so happy; I can finally ask questions about expo and trpc and get fresh answers. I confirmed this by asking chatgpt about the superbowl winners in 2022 & 2023.
how? login opens unrelated tab.
Found it:
https://chat.openai.com/gpts/discovery -> create own ->
Googles: Custom versions of Google. Anyone can easily build their own Google. No coding is required. You can make them for yourself, just for your company’s internal use, or for everyone. Creating one is as easy as starting a conversation, giving it instructions and extra knowledge, and picking what it can do, like searching the web, making images or analyzing data. The whole point of ChatGPT was go to one single pla…
That's just your own perception. OpenAI is trying to build AGI. You entered into the storyline at a specific junction and jumped to conclusions based on the limits of your own imagination, or something.