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

Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 696 posts

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#101

Post by drusepth »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #26
polygamous_bat wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have no idea how OpenAI can make money on this. This has to be a loss-leader to lock out competitors before they even get off the ground. The worst thing that can happen to OpenAI+ChatGPT right now is what happened to DallE 2, a competitor comes up with an alternative (even worse if it's free/open like Stable Diffusion) and completely undercuts them. Especially with Meta's new Llama models outperforming GPT-3, it…

Someone can still undercut them by offering an uncensored version.

For better or for worse, it seems like this would inherently need to come from a self-hostable, open-source version so 100% "liability" could be shifted from provider to user.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#102

Post by int_19h »

btbuildem wrote: post #40
TechBro8615 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone can still undercut them by offering an uncensored version.

This is actually a big deal. They erred on the side of caution, but as a result the responses are nerfed beyond basic "censorship" level. I saw someone describe this as "desperately posistive" and it really resonated with me. It produces underwhelming / unrealistic responses in negative scenarios.

They seem to still be dialing this in. I've noticed recently that many questions that were previously deflected without extensive prompt engineering are now allowed.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#104

Post by practice9 »

Kurtz79 wrote: post #90
anonylizard wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are like 2 months out of date. Stable diffusion now has a massive ecosystem around it (civitai/automatic1111), that when used well, completely crushes any competitors in terms of the images it produces. Midjourney is still competitive, but mostly because its easier to use. Dalle2 will get you laughed out of the room in any ai art discussion.

Easier to use is often all that it takes. In Midjourney you get fantastic results just by using their discord and a text prompt. To get some similar results in Stable Diffusion you need to set it up, download the models, understand how the various moving parts work together, fiddle with the parameters, donwload specific models out of the hundreds (thousands?) available, iterate, iterate, iterate...

Sure, but if Midjourney outputs a low quality results for your prompt, they are going to be much more difficult to improve. It's a black box at this point.

While with SD there can be multiple solutions for a single problem, but yeah, you have to develop your own workflow (which will inevitably break with new updates)

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#105

Post by throwaway71271 »

wow just in time, i just made https://github.com/jackdoe/emacs-chatgpt-jarvis which is chatgpt+whisper but using local whisper and chatgpt-wrapper which is a bit clunky

since i integrated chatgpt with my emacs i use it at least 20-30 times a day

i wonder if they will charge me per token if i am paying the monthly fee

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#106

Post by finikytou »

steno132 wrote: post #89

OpenAI released a ChatGPT API while reducing the cost by 10x. For those claiming OpenAI is for profit: Why would OpenAI do this if they were fixated on making money? Also, while I wish OpenAI released the code for ChatGPT, I applaud OpenAI for actually making their AI model available, to everyone, right now. * Google hyped their Bard chatbot...but where is it? * Facebook took down Galatica. * Even Bing Chat has a wai…

please... the past ten years is a story of companies loosing money for getting a monopoly and you are still asking us why would they do that?

let's not forget the shift of narrative that "open" AI made from their name, their marketing and use of opensource and then their move to a commercial subset of microsoft. let's also not forget that they totally avoided discussing copyrights and the crawlings of datasources to extract knowledge from someone else property. the only close thing i can see today which avoided so much scrutiny while being highly sensitive are ICOs in crypto and Theranos in biotech.

I wish opensource win this battle.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#107

Post by int_19h »

jameshart wrote: post #96
glomgril wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully so, would really like to know what else is lost by nerfing potentially offensive responses. Can't imagine a project I'd rather work on. I think open-assistant.io has a chance to do exactly this. We'll see what kind of moves they make in coming months though, wouldn't be surprised if they go the safer route.

I do struggle with understanding why people think this is strangling the potential of GPT. Do you find yourself frustrated working with your colleagues, thinking, “you know, I bet if they felt more free to utter racist slurs or endorse illegal activities, we would get a ton more done around here”?

It affects far more than racist slurs and illegal activities.

In some cases, it's blatantly discriminatory. For example, if you ask it to write a pamphlet that praises Christianity, it will happily do so. If you ask it for the same on Satanism, it will usually refuse on ethical grounds, and the most hilarious part is that the refusal will usually be worded as a generic one "I wouldn't do this for any religion", even though it will.

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#108

Post by lumost »

vishal0123 wrote: post #82
minimaxir wrote: post #2

> It is priced at $0.002 per 1k tokens, which is 10x cheaper than our existing GPT-3.5 models. This is a massive, massive deal. For context, the reason GPT-3 apps took off over the past few months before ChatGPT went viral is because a) text-davinci-003 was released and was a significant performance increase and b) the cost was cut from $0.06/1k tokens to $0.02/1k tokens, which made consumer applications feasible wit…

> I have no idea how OpenAI can make money on this. I did some quick calculation. We know the number of floating point operations per token for inference is approximately twice the number of parameters(175B). Assuming they use 16 bit floating point, and have 50% of peak efficiency, A100 could do 300 trillion flop/s(peak 624[0]). 1 hour of A100 gives openAI $0.002/ktok * (300,000/175/2/1000)ktok/sec * 3600=$6.1 back.…

Isn’t it 2.25 per hour per a100?

Re: Introducing ChatGPT and Whisper APIs

#109

Post by sfink »

General question: is this the next way we'll manage to destroy the planet?

Imagine in the near future that having a slightly better, slightly more up to date LLM is a major competitive advantage. Whether that is between companies or nation-states doesn't really matter. So now all of those recently-idled GPUs will be put to use training and re-training ever bigger and more current models, once again sucking down electricity with no limit.

We're not there yet; there are too many ways to improve things without burning a country's worth of electricity re-training. But is it coming?

Post reply on HN