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

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#531

Post by tom1337 »

dudus wrote: post #512
Someone1234 wrote: post #496

Why doesn't Pro include longer context windows? I'm a Plus member, and the biggest limitation I am running into by far is the maximum length of a context window. I'm having context fall out of scope throughout the conversion or not being able to give it a large document that I can then interrogate. So if I go from paying $20/month for 32,000 tokens, to $200/month for Pro, I expect something more akin to Enterprise's…

The longer the context the more backtracking it needs to do. It gets exponentially more expensive. You can increase it a little, but not enough to solve the problem. Instead you need to chunk your data and store it in a vector database so you can do semantic search and include only the bits that are most relevant in the context. LLM is a cool tool. You need to build around it. OpenAI should start shipping these other…

> Instead you need to chunk your data and store it in a vector database so you can do semantic search and include only the bits that are most relevant in the context.

Isn't that kind of what Anthropic is offering with projects? Where you can upload information and PDF files and stuff which are then always available in the chat?

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#532

Post by pests »

jgalt212 wrote: post #516
Mordisquitos wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards Interesting! I intentionally edit my keyboard layout to include the em-dash, as I enjoy using it out of sheer pomposity—I should undoubtedly delve into the extent to which my own comments have been used to train GPT models!

delve? Did ChatGPT write this comment for you?

For me, at least, it's common knowledge "delve" is overused and I would include it in a mock reply.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#533

Post by A_D_E_P_T »

jgalt212 wrote: post #516
Mordisquitos wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards Interesting! I intentionally edit my keyboard layout to include the em-dash, as I enjoy using it out of sheer pomposity—I should undoubtedly delve into the extent to which my own comments have been used to train GPT models!

delve? Did ChatGPT write this comment for you?

That's the joke.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#534

Post by sema4hacker »

blobbers wrote: post #367

My friend found 2 chimney sweep businesses. One charges $569, the other charges $150. Plot twist: the same guy runs both. They do the same thing and the same crew shows up.

Decades ago in Santa Cruz county California, I had to have a house bagged for termites for the pending sale. Turned out there was one contractor licensed to do the poison gas work, and all the pest service companies simply subcontracted to him. So no matter what pest service you chose, you got the same outfit doing the actual work.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#535

Post by ilt »

_cs2017_ wrote: post #481
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #407

I 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…

No internet access makes it very hard to benefit from o1 pro. Most of the complex questions I would ask require google search for research papers, language or library docs, etc. Not sure why o1 pro is banned from the internet, was it caught downloading too much porn or something?

Or worse still, referencing papers it shouldn’t be referencing because of paywalls may be.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#536

Post by pests »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #407

I 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…

> the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards

On Windows its Windows Key + . to get the emoji picker, its in the Symbols tab or find it in recents.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#537

Post by spaceman_2020 »

eminence32 wrote: post #40

$200 per month feels like a lot of a consumer subscription service (only thing I can think of in this range are some cable TV packages). Part of me wonders if this price is actually much more in line with actual costs (compared to the non-pro subscription)

$200 is the price point for quite a bit of business SaaS, so this isn't that outrageous if you're actually using it for work

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#538

Post by [deleted] »

jgalt212 wrote: post #516
Mordisquitos wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards Interesting! I intentionally edit my keyboard layout to include the em-dash, as I enjoy using it out of sheer pomposity—I should undoubtedly delve into the extent to which my own comments have been used to train GPT models!

delve? Did ChatGPT write this comment for you?

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#539

Post by koyote »

mongol wrote: post #514
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Journalism is not only about writing. It is about sources, talking to people, being on the ground, connecting dots, asking the right questions. Journalists can certainly benefit from AI and good journalists will have jobs for a long time still.

While the above is true, I'd say the majority of what passes as journalism these days has none of the above and the writing is below what an AI writer could produce :(

It's actually surprising how many articles on 'respected' news websites have typos. You'd think there would be automated spellcheckers and at least one 'peer review' (probably too much to ask an actual editor to review the article these days...).

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#540

Post by cma »

tom1337 wrote: post #531
dudus wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The longer the context the more backtracking it needs to do. It gets exponentially more expensive. You can increase it a little, but not enough to solve the problem. Instead you need to chunk your data and store it in a vector database so you can do semantic search and include only the bits that are most relevant in the context. LLM is a cool tool. You need to build around it. OpenAI should start shipping these other…

> Instead you need to chunk your data and store it in a vector database so you can do semantic search and include only the bits that are most relevant in the context. Isn't that kind of what Anthropic is offering with projects? Where you can upload information and PDF files and stuff which are then always available in the chat?

They put all the project in the context, works much better than RAG when it fits. 200k context for their pro plan, and 500K for enterprise.
Post reply on HN