Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT Pro

openai.com

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#581

Part of my justification for spending $20 per month on ChatGPT Plus was that I'd have the best access to the latest models and advanced features. I'll probably roll back to the free plan rather than pay $20/mo for mid tier plan access and support.

That's a weird reaction. You're not getting any less for your $20.

For now.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#582
post #572

OpenAI 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…

Teams winning on price instead of quality is very telling of the state of business. Your #1/#2 communication tool being regarded as a cost to be saved upon.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#583

The argument of more compute power for this plan can be true, but this is also a pricing tactic known as the decoy effect or anchoring. Here's how it works: 1. A company introduces a high-priced option (the "decoy"), often not intended to be the best value for most customers. 2. This premium option makes the other plans seem like better deals in comparison, nudging customers toward the one the company actually wants…

This is also known as the Door-in-the-face technique[1] in social psychology. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique

That’s a really basic sales technique much older than the 1975 study. I wonder if it went under a different name or this was a case of studying and then publishing something that was already well-known outside of academia.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#584

The argument of more compute power for this plan can be true, but this is also a pricing tactic known as the decoy effect or anchoring. Here's how it works: 1. A company introduces a high-priced option (the "decoy"), often not intended to be the best value for most customers. 2. This premium option makes the other plans seem like better deals in comparison, nudging customers toward the one the company actually wants…

Of course this breaks down once you have a competitor like Anthropic, serving similarly-priced Plan A and B for their equivalently powerful models; adding a more expensive decoy plan C doesn't help OpenAI when their plan B pricing is primarily compared against Anthropic's plan B .

Leadership at this crop of tech companies is more like followership. Whether it's 'no politics', or sudden layoffs, or 'founder mode', or 'work from home'... one CEO has an idea and three dozen other CEOs unthinkingly adopt it.

Several comments in this thread have used Anthropic's lower pricing as a criticism, but it's probably moot: a month from now Anthropic will release its own $200 model.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI writing detectors are snake oil

Startup I'm at has generated a LOT of content using LLMs and once you've reviewed enough of the output, you can easily see specific patterns in the output. Some words/phrases that, by default, it overuses: "dive into", "delve into", "the world of", and others. You correct it with instructions, but it will then find synonyms so there is also a structural pattern to the output that it favors by default. For example, if…

> ...once you've reviewed enough of the output, you can easily see specific patterns in the output

That is true, but more importantly, are those patterns sufficient to distinguish between AI-generated content from human-generated content? Humans express themselves very differently by region and country ( e.g. "do the needful" in not common in the midwest, "orthogonal" and "order of magnitude" are used more on HN than most other places). Outside of watermaking, detecting AI-generated text is with an acceptably small false-positive error rate is nearly impossible.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#586

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…

What’s the context window?

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#587

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…

In my experience OpenAI models perform worse on long contexts than Anthropic/Google's, even when using the cheaper ones.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#588
post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Startup I'm at has generated a LOT of content using LLMs and once you've reviewed enough of the output, you can easily see specific patterns in the output. Some words/phrases that, by default, it overuses: "dive into", "delve into", "the world of", and others. You correct it with instructions, but it will then find synonyms so there is also a structural pattern to the output that it favors by default. For example, if…

All of what you described can change wildly from model to model. Even across different versions of the same model. Maybe a database could be built with “tells” organized by model.

Exactly. Fixing the old tells just means there are new ones.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#589
post #572

OpenAI 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…

Sometimes I wish Apple did more for business use cases. The same https://security.apple.com/blog/private-cloud-compute/ tech that will provide auditable isolation for consumer user sessions would be incredibly welcome in a world where every other company has proven a desire to monetize your data.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#590
post #431

The argument of more compute power for this plan can be true, but this is also a pricing tactic known as the decoy effect or anchoring. Here's how it works: 1. A company introduces a high-priced option (the "decoy"), often not intended to be the best value for most customers. 2. This premium option makes the other plans seem like better deals in comparison, nudging customers toward the one the company actually wants…

An example of this is something I learned from a former employee who went to work for Encyclopedia Brittanica 'back in the day'. I actually invited the former employee to come back to our office so I could understand and learn from exactly what he had been taught (noting of course this was back before the internet obviously where info like that was not as available...) So they charge (as I recall from what he told me…

This is called price anchoring.
Post reply on HN