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

A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

asim.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 526 posts

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#341

Post by paul7986 »

spencerchubb wrote: post #330
paul7986 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Few weeks or more ago I discovered Burger King has a cotton candy slurpee/icee ... I've been enjoying one once to a few times a week. But not all locations have it yet chatGPT seemed to know which locations have it & each one it told me ..they had it available to buy. Very useful so today went to one closest to me which always has it but today they said we no longer do. Thus I asked chatGPT has been discontinued as w…

That is indeed a weakness of chatgpt - it's not so good with super current information That is because it is only trained on info up to a certain date It's good to know what tools are good and bad at

ummm chatGPT is very slowly becoming mainstream... for to become fully such no user and or prospective user cares about it's limitations .. it needs to work like previous similar technologies do like Siri and Alexa.

User experience is utmost important without it Apple wouldnt be apple and chatGPT as it's current trajectory is going looks to become as big as the current biggies. Thus everyone including parents/grandparents/etc will be using it and those users dont care about LLM talk and etc.. they have no idea what it is. chatGPT just works for them and somewhat magically so.. it even knows the current date as mom, dad or grandma be like this thing doesnt know the current date Siri does.

You must not be a UX professional ;-)

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#342

Post by th0ma5 »

A lot of comments here missing the huge point that even if the fault is obvious to many, how many things were also obvious that were fixed, and how you just simply run out of attention trying to keep up with all the mistakes transformers keep putting back in the more you fight with them.

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#343

Post by RamblingCTO »

steelbrain wrote: post #107
nicce wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the most known example https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/19065 It is not an issue if you host in Vercel. Implementing the requested feature would make the framework much better and easier to use when self-hosted elsewhere. But there is neglection to resolve the issue. This is just one case.

FWIW, we host on Cloudflare and use their API to resize images on the fly and we're fine. Not so much a "lock-in" if other vendors can fill-in, is it?

If you need to change it when switching vendors and only they offer it/it's proprietary, it's vendor lock-in.

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#344

Post by astromaniak »

arjvik wrote: post #329
primitivesuave wrote: post #314

I spotted the error instantly. With all due respect to your team - this has nothing to do with ChatGPT and everything to do with using a programming model that your team does not have sufficient expertise in. Even if this error managed to slip by code review, it would have been caught with virtually any monitoring solution, many of which take less than 5 minutes to set up.

To be fair, if I wasn't looking for this bug I never would have spotted it. That being said, you're entirely right that any monitoring or even the most basic manual testing should have instantly caught this.

Easy enough, ChatGPT can write verification code along the main line. Just ask.

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#345

Post by viraptor »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #304
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hindsight is 20/20. It’s always easy to think of tests that would have caught the issue. Can you think of tests that will catch the next issue though?

Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but a bunch of these comments are replying to the assertion "And I can't think of one non-contrived reason to do it" (have a single test case with multiple subscriptions). That's the assertion I think is totally weird - I can think of tons of non-contrived reasons to have multiple subscriptions in a single test case. I wouldn't pillory someone if they left out a test case like this, but neit…

Go on then - so far the examples I've seen don't make sense in the context of stripe.

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#346

Post by 4hg4ufxhy »

internetter wrote: post #4

"Note: I want to preface this by saying yes the practices here are bad and could have been avoided. This was from a different time under large time constraints. Please read with that in mind" These "constraints" are why I'm terrified of subscribing to software

Having worked with some legacy subscription code it can be quite nasty.

We had race conditions where we would charge users twice

This has made me paranoid that any time I see timeout or error related to money I assume it went through and come back later.

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#349

Post by _giorgio_ »

A web site with only one working page. Links to hone it to anywhere else funny work. Great. Surely a chatGPT mistake! :-D

Edit: nothing works at all.

404 ʕノ•ᴥ•ʔノ ︵ ┻━┻ It looks like this page doesn't exist. Let's get you back home.

Re: A ChatGPT mistake cost us $10k

#350

Post by cuppypastexprt »

animex wrote: post #306

No, ChatGPT made you the money that your app generated since you had no ability to implement it otherwise/without ChatGPT. Your inability to code, debug, log, monitor cost you the $10k. ChatGPT is net positive in this story.

Looking at this team's project at github.com/reworkd, it clearly tells the maturity of the product as well as the team. Emoji driven development. Emoji's for all commit messages. Monkeys, bananas, rockets, fireworks, you name it, they have it in their commit message.
Post reply on HN