91–100 of 1001 posts
The price feels outrageous, but I think the unsaid truth of this is that they think o1 is good enough to replace employees. For example, if it's really as good at coding as they say, I could see this being a point where some people decide that a team of 5 devs with o1 pro can do the work of 6 or 7 devs without o1 pro.
Individual users will be priced out of frontier models if this becomes a trend.
The price feels outrageous, but I think the unsaid truth of this is that they think o1 is good enough to replace employees. For example, if it's really as good at coding as they say, I could see this being a point where some people decide that a team of 5 devs with o1 pro can do the work of 6 or 7 devs without o1 pro.
Suppose an employee costs a business, say, $10k/mo; it's 50 subscriptions. Can giving access to the AI to, say, 40 employees improve their performance enough to avoid the need of hiring another employee? This does not sound outlandish to me, at least in certain industries.
Let’s see if those folks saying they’ve doubled their productivity will pay.
I've not found value anywhere remotely close to this lol, but i'd buy it to experiment if they had a solid suite of tooling. Ie an LSP that offered real value, maybe a side-monitor assistant that helped me with the code in my IDE of choice, etc. At $200/m merely having a great AI (if it even is that) without insanely good tooling is pointless to me.
For the latter, Claude is great, but for the former, my usage pattern would be poorly served by something that costs $200 and I get to use it maybe a dozen times a month.
The price feels outrageous, but I think the unsaid truth of this is that they think o1 is good enough to replace employees. For example, if it's really as good at coding as they say, I could see this being a point where some people decide that a team of 5 devs with o1 pro can do the work of 6 or 7 devs without o1 pro.
I am not so sure about "replace" atleast at my company we are always short staffed (mostly cause we cant find people fast enough given how long the whole interview cycle takes). It might actually free some people up to do more interviews.
Maybe they're just trying to get some money out of it while they can, as open models and other competition loom closer and closer behind...
There are many use cases for which the price can go even higher. I look at recent interactions with people that were working at an interview mill: Multiple people in a boiler room interviewing for companies all day long, with a computer set up so that our audio was being piped to o1. They had a reasonable prompt to remove many chatbot-ism, and make it provide answers that seem people-like: We were 100% interviewing t…
[flagged]