[flagged]
Could be a case of price discrimination [1], and a way to fuel the hype.
[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/price_discrimination.as...
ChatGPT Pro
441–450 of 1001 posts
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#442[flagged]
> In other words, it's a con.
Such a silly conclusion to draw based on a gut feeling, and to see all comments piggyback on it like it's a given feels like I'm going crazy. How can you all be so certain?
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#443OpenAI is racing against two clocks: the commoditization clock (how quickly open-source alternatives catch up) and the monetization clock (their need to generate substantial revenue to justify their valuation).
The ultimate success of this strategy depends on what we might call the enterprise AI adoption curve - whether large organizations will prioritize the kind of integrated, reliable, and "safe" AI solutions OpenAI is positioning itself to provide over cheaper but potentially less polished alternatives.
This is strikingly similar to IBM's historical bet on enterprise computing - sacrificing the low-end market to focus on high-value enterprise customers who would pay premium prices for reliability and integration. The key question is whether AI will follow a similar maturation pattern or if the open-source nature of the technology will force a different evolutionary path.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#444I just bought a pro subscription. First impressions: The new o1-Pro model is an insanely good writer. Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards, it has none of the quirks and tells of old GPT-4/4o/o1. It managed to totally fool every "AI writing detector" I ran it through. It can handle unusually long prompts. It appears to be very good at complex data analysis. I need to put it through i…
AI writing detectors are snake oil
Yeah but they "detect" the characteristic AI style: The limited way it structures sentences, the way it lays out arguments, the way it tends to close with an "in conclusion" paragraph, certain word choices, etc. o1-Pro doesn't do any of that. It writes like a human.
Damnit. It's too good. It just saved me ~6 hours in drafting a complicated and bespoke legal document. Before you ask: I know what I'm doing, and it did a better job in five minutes than I could have done over those six hours. Homework is over. Journalism is over. A large slice of the legal profession is over. For real this time.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#445I just bought a pro subscription. First impressions: The new o1-Pro model is an insanely good writer. Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards, it has none of the quirks and tells of old GPT-4/4o/o1. It managed to totally fool every "AI writing detector" I ran it through. It can handle unusually long prompts. It appears to be very good at complex data analysis. I need to put it through i…
Would you mind sharing any favourite example chats?
Give me a prompt and I'll share the result.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#446F me. $2400 per year? That is bananas. I did not see if it offered any API channels with this plan. With that I would probably see it as a valuable return but without it…that is a big nope.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#447I just bought a pro subscription. First impressions: The new o1-Pro model is an insanely good writer. Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards, it has none of the quirks and tells of old GPT-4/4o/o1. It managed to totally fool every "AI writing detector" I ran it through. It can handle unusually long prompts. It appears to be very good at complex data analysis. I need to put it through i…
[deleted]
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#448[dead]
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#449Earlier 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.
What specific use cases are you referring to where that poses a risk? I've been using LLMs for years now (both directly and as part of applications) and can't think of a single instance where the output constituted a risk or where it was relied upon for critical decisions.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 a…
It is really great when it works, but challenge is I've had it sometimes not understanding a detailed programming question and it confidently gives an incorrect answer. Going back and forth a few times ends up clear it really does not know answer, but I end up going in circles. I know LLMs can't really tell you "sorry I don't know this one", but I wish they could.