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

ChatGPT Pro

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#411

Post by vbezhenar »

omarhaneef wrote: post #271
crazygringo wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In other words, it's a con. A con like that wouldn't last very long. This is for people who rely enough on ChatGPT Pro features that it becomes worth it. Whether they pay for it because they're freelance, or their employer does. Just because an LLM doesn't boost your productivity, doesn't mean it doesn't for people in other lines of work. Whether LLM's help you at your work is extremely domain-dependent.

I think this is probably right but so far it seems that the areas in which an LLM is most effective do fine with the lower power models. Example: the 4o or Claude are great for coding, summarizing and rewriting emails. So which domains require a slightly better model? I suppose if the error rate in code or summary goes down even 10%, it might be worth $180/month.

Few days ago I had issue with IPsec VPN behind NAT. I spend few hours Googling around, tinkering with system, I had some rough understanding of what goes wrong, but not much and I had no idea how to solve this issue.

I made a very exhaustive question to ChatGPT o1-preview, including all information I though is relevant. Something like good forums question. Well, 10 seconds later it spew me a working solution. I was ashamed, because I have 20 years of experience under my belt and this model solved non-trivial task much better than me.

I was ashamed but at the same time that's a superpower. And I'm ready to pay $200 to get solid answers that I just can't get in a reasonable timeframe.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#413

Post by wvenable »

bronco21016 wrote: post #39
MarcScott wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, as an educator, I am already seeing a digital divide occurring, with regard to accessing AI. This is not even at a premium/pro subscription level, but simply at a 'who has access to a device at home or work' level, and who is keeping up with the emerging tech. I speak to kids that use LLMs all the time to assist them with their school work, and others who simply have no knowledge that this tech exists. I…

What are some productive ways students are using LLMs for aiding learning? Obviously there is the “write this paper for me” but that’s not productive. Are students genuinely doing stuff like “2 + x = 4, help me understand how to solve for x?”

My son doesn't use it but I use to help him with his homework. For example, I can take a photograph of his math homework and get the LLM to mark the work, tell me what he got wrong, and make suggestions on how to correct it.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#414

Post by llm_trw »

daveguy wrote: post #188
ghshephard wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do a lot of work in an area that o1 is strong in - $200/month effectively rounds down to $0 - and a single good answer at the right time could justify that entire $200 in a single go.

I feel like a single bad answer at the wrong time could cost a heck of a lot more than $200. And these LLMs are riddled with bad answers.

That's why you have a human in the loop responsible for the answer.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#415

Post by athrowaway3z »

yosito wrote: post #75

[flagged]

I've actually hit a interesting situation a few times that make use of this. If some language feature, argument, or configuration option doesn't exists it will hallucinate one.

This hallucination is usually a very good choice to name the option / API.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#416

Post by thelastparadise »

cdrini wrote: post #405
eigenvalue wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't disagree more, I will be signing up for this as soon as I can, and it's a complete no brainer.

What will you be using it for? Where do you think you'll see the biggest benefit over the cheaper plan?

The megga disappointment is o1 is performing worse than o1-preview [1], and claude 3.6 had already nearly caught up to o1-preview.

1. https://x.com/nrehiew_/status/1864763064374976928

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#417

Post by sdesol »

xur17 wrote: post #201
015a wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The math is never this clean, and no one has ever experienced this (though I'm sure its a justification that was floated at OAI HQ at least once).

It's never this clean, but it is direction-ally correct. If I make $300k / year, and I can tell that chatgpt already saves me hours or even days per month, $200 is a laughable amount. If I feel like pro is even slightly better, it's worth $200 just to know that I always have the best option available. Heck, it's probably worth $200 even if I'm not confident it's better just in case it is. For the same reason I don't…

> cheapest AI model when asking questions and then switch to the more expensive if it doesn't work.

The thing is, more expensive isn't guaranteed to be better. The more expensive models are better most of the time, but not all the time. I talk about this more in this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42313401#42313990

Since LLMs are non-deterministic, there is no guarantee that GPT-4o is better than GPT-4o mini. GPT-4o is most likely going to be better, but sometimes the simplicity of GPT-4o mini makes it better.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#418

Post by outside415 »

vbezhenar wrote: post #397
yosito wrote: post #75

[flagged]

I would pay $200 for GPT4o. Since GPT4, ChatGPT is absolutely necessary for my work and for my life. It changed every workflow like Google changed. I'm paying $20 to remove ads from youtube which I watch may be once a week, so $20 for ChatGPT was a steal. That said, my "issue" might be that I usually work alone and I don't have anyone to consult with. I can bother people on forums, but these days forums are pretty mu…

this is more or less my take too. if tomorrow all Claude and ChatGPT became $200/month I would still pay. The value they provide me with far, far exceeds that. so many cynics in this thread.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#419

Post by knowsuchagency »

ruszki wrote: post #265
j2kun wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so I kept giving the model the output, and it provided updated formulas back and forth for 4.5hrs I read this as: "I have already ceded my expertise to an LLM, so I am happy that it is getting faster because now I can pay more money to be even more stuck using an LLM" Maybe the alternative to going back and forth with an AI for 4.5 hours is working smarter and using tools you're an expert in. Or building expertise…

If somebody claims that something can be done with LLM in 10 minutes which takes 4.5 hours for them, then they are definitely not experts. They probably have some surface knowledge, but that’s all. There is a reason why the better LLM demos are related to learn something new, like a new programming language. So far, all of the other kind of demos which I saw (e.g. generating new endpoints based on older ones) were cl…

No true Scotsman

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#420

Post by shikon7 »

nine_k wrote: post #380
drdrey wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are you assuming that you can do o1 inference on a single h100?

Good question. How many H100s does it take? Is there any way to guess / approximate that?

You need enough RAM to store the model and the KV-cache depending on context size. Assuming the model has a trillion parameters (there are only rumours how many there actually are) and uses 8 bit per parameter, 16 H100 might be sufficient.
Post reply on HN