$200 per month. Ok no.
ChatGPT Pro
571–580 of 1001 posts
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#572OpenAI 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 Open…
I wonder if OpenAI can break into enterprise. I don’t see much of a path for them, at least here in the EU. Even if they do manage to build some sort of trust as far as data safety goes, and I’m not sure they’ll have much more luck with that than Facebook had trying to sell that corporate thing they did (still do?). But if they did, they will still be facing the very real issue of having to compete with Microsoft.
I view that competition a bit like the Teams vs anything else. Teams wasn’t better, but it was good enough and it’s “sort of free”. It’s the same with the Azure AI tools, they aren’t feee but since you don’t exactly pay list pricing in enterprise they can be fairly cheap. Co-pilot is obviously horrible compared to CharGPT, but a lot of the Azure AI tooling works perfectly well and much of it integrates seamlessly with what you already have running in Azure. We recently “lost” our OCR for a document flow, and since it wasn’t recoverable we needed to do something fast. Well the Azure Document Intelligence was so easy to hook up to the flow it was ridiculous. I don’t want to sound like a Microsoft commercial. I think they are a good IT business partner, but the products are also sort of a trap where all those tiny things create the perfect vendor lock-in. Which is bad, but it’s also where European Enterprise is at since the “monopoly” Microsoft has on the suite of products makes it very hard to not use them. Teams again being the perfect example since it “won” by basically being a 0 in the budget even though it isn’t actually free.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#573Yesterday, I spent 4.5hrs crafting a very complex Google Sheets formula—think Lambda, Map, Let, etc., for 82 lines. If I knew it would take that long, I would have just done it via AppScript. But it was 50% kinda working, so I kept giving the model the output, and it provided updated formulas back and forth for 4.5hrs. Say my time is $100/hr - that’s $450. So even if the new ChatGPT Pro mode isn’t any smarter but is…
I have written very complicated Excel formula in the past. I don't anymore.
Long excel formulas are really just bad "one liners". You should be splitting your operation into multiple cells or finding a more elegant solution. This is especially true in excel where your debug tools are quite limited!
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#574I know this is no different than any other expert situation in life. $ buys the best lawyers, the best doctors, the best teachers.... But I personally interact with a lawyer less than once every few years. A doctor a couple of times a year. Teachers almost never as an adult.
But now $ buys better (teacher/lawyer/doctor/scientist) type thing that I use daily.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#575Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't true. Transformer architectures generally take quadratic time wrt sequence length, not exponential. Architectural innovations like flash attention also mitigate this somewhat. Backtracking isn't involved, transformers are feedforward. Google advertises support for 128k tokens, with 2M-token sequences available to folks who pay the big bucks: https://blog.google/technology/ai/google-gemini-next-generat...
During inference time, yes, but training time does scale exponentially as backpropagation still has to happen. You can’t use fancy flash attention tricks either.
I’m confused. Backdrop scales linearly w
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#576Question, what stops openai from downgrading existing models so that you're pushed up the subscription tiers to ever more expensive models? I'd imagine they're currently losing a ton of money supplying everyone with decent models with a ton of compute behind them because they want us to become addicted to using them right? The fact that classic free web searching is becoming diluted by low quality AI content will mak…
> I'd imagine they're currently losing a ton of money supplying everyone I can't tell how much they loose but they also have decent revenue "The company's annualized revenue topped $1.6 billion in December [2023]" https://www.reuters.com/technology/openai-hits-2-bln-revenue...
What's important, and I don't think has ever been revealed by OpenAI, is what the margin is on actual use of the models.
If they're losing money but just because they're investing billions in R&D, while only spending a few hundred million to serve the use that's bringing in $1.6B then it would be a positive story despite the technical loss, just like Amazon's years if aggressive growth at the cost of profits.
But if they're losing money because the server costs needed for the use that brings in $1.6B are $3B then they've got a scaling problem until they either raise prices or lower costs or both.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#577OpenAI 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 Open…
[deleted]
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#578Earlier quoted context omitted.
This service is going to be devastating to consultants and middle managers.
I trained an agent that operates as a McKinsey consultant. Its system prompt is a souped up version of: “Answer all requests by inventorying all the ways the requestor should increase revenue and decrease expenses.”
To be fair you mostly hire McKinsey as a fall guy. You just can't hate an LLM in the same way as a bunch of 22 year Olds in suits.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#579OpenAI 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 Open…
I wonder if OpenAI can break into enterprise. I don’t see much of a path for them, at least here in the EU. Even if they do manage to build some sort of trust as far as data safety goes, and I’m not sure they’ll have much more luck with that than Facebook had trying to sell that corporate thing they did (still do?). But if they did, they will still be facing the very real issue of having to compete with Microsoft. I…
Man, if they can solve that "trust" problem, OpenAI could really have an big advantage. Imagine if they were nonprofit, open source, documented all of the data that their training was being done with, or published all of their boardroom documents. That'd be a real distinguishing advantage. Somebody should start an organization like that.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#580Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that OpenAI don't really have the enterprise market at all. Their APIs are closer in that many companies are using them to power features in other software, primarily Microsoft, but they're not the ones providing end user value to enterprises with APIs. As for ChatGPT, it's a consumer tool, not an enterprise tool. It's not really integrated into an enterprises' existing toolset, it's not integrated int…
Is their valuation proposition self fulfilling: the more people pipe their queries to OpenAI, the more training data they have to get better?
I don't think user submitted question/answer is as useful for training as you (and many others) think. It's not useless, but it's certainly not some goldmine either considering how noisy it is (from the users) and how synthetic it is (the responses). Further, while I wouldn't put it past them to use user data in that way, there's certainly a PR/controversy cost to doing so, even if it's outlined in their ToS.