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

OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 518 posts

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#301

Post by refulgentis »

johnb231 wrote: post #298
thegeomaster wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. Of course technically they didn't do anything explicitly against the public guidance (the checks and balances would never let them), but naming a model with a date very strongly implies immutability. It's the same logic of why UB in C/C++ isn't a license to do whatever the compiler wants. We're humans and we operate on implications, common-sense assumptions and trust.

The model is labelled as Preview. There are no guarantees of stability or availability for Preview models. Not intended for production workloads. https://cloud.google.com/products?hl=en#product-launch-stage... "At Preview, products or features are ready for testing by customers. Preview offerings are often publicly announced, but are not necessarily feature-complete, and no SLAs or technical support commitments are p…

There hasn't been a non-preview Gemini since...November? The previews are the same as everyone else's release cadance, "preview" is just a magic wand that meant the Launchcal (google's internal signoff tool, i.e. "wave will never happen again) needs less signoffs. Then it got to the point date-pinned models were getting swapped in, in the name of doing us a favor, and it's a...novel idea, we can both agree at the least.

I bet someone at Google would be a bit surprised to see someone jumping to legalese to act like this...novelty...is inherently due to the preview status, and based on anything more than a sense that there's no net harm done to us if it costs the same and is better.

I'm not sure they're wrong.

But it also leads to a sort of "nobody knows how anything works because we have 2^N configs and 5 bits" - for instance, 05-06 was also upgraded to 06-05. Except it wasn't, if you sent variable thinking to 05-06 after upgrade it'd fail. (and don't get me started on the 5 different thinking configurations for Gemini 2.5 flash thinking vs. gemini 05-06 vs. 06-05 and 0 thinking)

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#302

Post by energy123 »

tedsanders wrote: post #159
CSMastermind wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is almost certainly what they're doing and rebranding the original o3 model as "o3-pro"

Nope, not what we’re doing. o3 is still o3 (no nerfing) and o3-pro is new and better than o3. If we were lying about this, it would be really easy to catch us - just run evals. (I work at OpenAI.)

Is it o3 (low), o3 (medium) or o3 (high)? Different model names have crept into the various benchmarks over the last few months.

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#303

Post by 5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV »

bgwalter wrote: post #279
5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels eerily similar to a post I've read a within the last month. Either I'm having a deja vu, it's a coincidence that the same exact story is mentioned or theres something else going on

What should be going on? A regular Google search for "openai persona verify organization" shows withpersona.com in the second search result.

Yeah ok guess I misremembered it a bit but I was curious too and found the previous one I've thought of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43795406

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#304

Post by johnb231 »

refulgentis wrote: post #301
johnb231 wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The model is labelled as Preview. There are no guarantees of stability or availability for Preview models. Not intended for production workloads. https://cloud.google.com/products?hl=en#product-launch-stage... "At Preview, products or features are ready for testing by customers. Preview offerings are often publicly announced, but are not necessarily feature-complete, and no SLAs or technical support commitments are p…

There hasn't been a non-preview Gemini since...November? The previews are the same as everyone else's release cadance, "preview" is just a magic wand that meant the Launchcal (google's internal signoff tool, i.e. "wave will never happen again) needs less signoffs. Then it got to the point date-pinned models were getting swapped in, in the name of doing us a favor, and it's a...novel idea, we can both agree at the lea…

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say.

It's a preview model - for testing only, not for production. Really not that complicated.

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#305

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

johnb231 wrote: post #298
thegeomaster wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. Of course technically they didn't do anything explicitly against the public guidance (the checks and balances would never let them), but naming a model with a date very strongly implies immutability. It's the same logic of why UB in C/C++ isn't a license to do whatever the compiler wants. We're humans and we operate on implications, common-sense assumptions and trust.

The model is labelled as Preview. There are no guarantees of stability or availability for Preview models. Not intended for production workloads. https://cloud.google.com/products?hl=en#product-launch-stage... "At Preview, products or features are ready for testing by customers. Preview offerings are often publicly announced, but are not necessarily feature-complete, and no SLAs or technical support commitments are p…

There's a very large gulf between "what makes sense to Google" and "what makes sense to Human Beings". I have so many rants about Google's poor treatment of "customers" that they feel like Oracle to me now. Like every time I use them, I'm really just falling prey to my own misguided idea that this time I won't get screwed over.

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#306

Post by xz0r »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #167
arealaccount wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dying for a reference on the cult stuff, a quick search didn’t provide anything interesting.

https://futurism.com/chatgpt-mental-health-crises , which references the more famous https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-spi... but is a newer article.

The article links to a forum post which kind of explains how engagement is maximised https://community.openai.com/t/uncovering-the-intent-behind-...

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#307

Post by refulgentis »

johnb231 wrote: post #304
refulgentis wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There hasn't been a non-preview Gemini since...November? The previews are the same as everyone else's release cadance, "preview" is just a magic wand that meant the Launchcal (google's internal signoff tool, i.e. "wave will never happen again) needs less signoffs. Then it got to the point date-pinned models were getting swapped in, in the name of doing us a favor, and it's a...novel idea, we can both agree at the lea…

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say. It's a preview model - for testing only, not for production. Really not that complicated.

So you don't have anything to contribute beyond, and aren't interested in anything beyond, citing of terms?

Why are you in the comments section of a engineering news site?

(note: beyond your, excuse me while I'm direct now, boorish know-nothing reply, the terms you are citing have nothing to do with the thing people are actually discussing around you, despite your best efforts. It doesn't say "we might swap in a new service, congrats!", nor does it have anything to say about that. Your legalese at most describes why they'd pull 05-06, not forward 05-06 to 06-05. This is a novel idea.)

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#308

Post by bitpush »

simonw wrote: post #295
asadotzler wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You trust their PR statements?

Seems more likely to me then them deciding to take a sizable loss on inference by dropping prices by 80% for no reason. Optimizing serving isn't unlikely: all of the big AI vendors keep finding new efficiencies, it's been an ongoing trend over the past two years.

This is my sense as well. You dont drop 80% on a random Tuesday based on scale, you do it with an explicit goal to get market share at the expense of $$.

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#309

Post by johnb231 »

refulgentis wrote: post #307
johnb231 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say. It's a preview model - for testing only, not for production. Really not that complicated.

So you don't have anything to contribute beyond, and aren't interested in anything beyond, citing of terms? Why are you in the comments section of a engineering news site? (note: beyond your, excuse me while I'm direct now, boorish know-nothing reply, the terms you are citing have nothing to do with the thing people are actually discussing around you , despite your best efforts. It doesn't say "we might swap in a new…

This case was simply a matter of people not understanding the terms of service. There is nothing more to be said. It's that simple. The "engineers" should know that before deploying to prod. Basic competence.

And I mean I genuinely do not understand what you are trying to say. Couldn't parse it.

Re: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80%

#310

Post by refulgentis »

johnb231 wrote: post #309
refulgentis wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you don't have anything to contribute beyond, and aren't interested in anything beyond, citing of terms? Why are you in the comments section of a engineering news site? (note: beyond your, excuse me while I'm direct now, boorish know-nothing reply, the terms you are citing have nothing to do with the thing people are actually discussing around you , despite your best efforts. It doesn't say "we might swap in a new…

This case was simply a matter of people not understanding the terms of service. There is nothing more to be said. It's that simple. The "engineers" should know that before deploying to prod. Basic competence. And I mean I genuinely do not understand what you are trying to say. Couldn't parse it.

John, do you understand that the thing you're quoting says "We reserve the right to pull things", not "We reserve the right to swap in a new service"?

Do you understand that even if it did say that, that wasn't true either? It was some weird undocumentable half-beast?

I have exactly your attitude about their cavalier use of preview for all things Gemini, and even people's use of the preview models.

But I've also been on this site for 15 years and am a bit wow'd by your interlocution style here -- it's quite rare to see someone flip "the 3P provider swapped the service on us!" into "well they said they could turn it off, of course you should expect it to be swapped for the first time ever!" insert dull sneer about the quality of other engineers

Post reply on HN