we've been waiting for it)
ChatGPT Pro
101–110 of 1001 posts
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#102I think should hire an economist or ask their superintelligence about the demand. The market is very shallow and nobody has any kind of moat. There is simply not enough math problems out there to apply it to. 200$ price tag really makes no sense to me unless this thing also cooks hot meals. I may be buying it for 100$ though.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#103I consistently get significantly better performance from Anthropic at a literal order of magnitude less cost. I am incredibly doubtful that this new GPT is 10x Claude unless it is embracing some breakthrough, secret, architecture nobody has heard of.
Or Anthropic will follow suit.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#104[flagged]
Is $200 a lot if you end up using it quite often?
It makes me wonder why they don't want to offer a usage based pricing model.
Is it because people really believe it makes a much worse product offering?
Why not offer some of the same capability as pay-per-use?
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotally, as an educator, I am already seeing a digital divide occurring, with regard to accessing AI. This is not even at a premium/pro subscription level, but simply at a 'who has access to a device at home or work' level, and who is keeping up with the emerging tech. I speak to kids that use LLMs all the time to assist them with their school work, and others who simply have no knowledge that this tech exists. I…
What are some productive ways students are using LLMs for aiding learning? Obviously there is the “write this paper for me” but that’s not productive. Are students genuinely doing stuff like “2 + x = 4, help me understand how to solve for x?”
Absolutely. My son got a 6th grade AI “ban” lifted by showing how they could use it productively.
Basically they had to adapt a novel to a comic book form — by using AI to generate pencil drawings, they achieved the goal of the assignment (demonstrating understanding of the story) without having the computer just do their homework.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
Suppose an employee costs a business, say, $10k/mo; it's 50 subscriptions. Can giving access to the AI to, say, 40 employees improve their performance enough to avoid the need of hiring another employee? This does not sound outlandish to me, at least in certain industries.
That’s the wrong question. The only question is “is this price reflective of 10x performance over the competition?”. The answer is almost definitely no.
If I’m understanding their own graphs correctly, it’s not even 10x their own next lowest pricing tier.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#107Re: ChatGPT Pro
#108lol
lmao even
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s insane to me that they don’t have a “pay $10 to have this temporary limit lifted” micro transaction model. They are leaving money on the table.
they are optimizing for new accounts/market share over short term rev
Which pushes customers to other services when they are unable to provide.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#110There are many use cases for which the price can go even higher. I look at recent interactions with people that were working at an interview mill: Multiple people in a boiler room interviewing for companies all day long, with a computer set up so that our audio was being piped to o1. They had a reasonable prompt to remove many chatbot-ism, and make it provide answers that seem people-like: We were 100% interviewing t…
So, wait a minute, when interviewing candidates, you're making them invest their valuable time talking to an AI interviewer, and not even disclosing to them that they aren't even talking to a real human? That seems highly unethical to me, yet not even slightly surprising. My question is, what variables are being optimized for here? It's certainly not about efficiently matching people with jobs, it seems to be more ab…
Scams and other antisocial use cases are basically the only ones for which the damn things are actually the kind of productivity rocket-fuel people want them to be, so far.
We better hope that changes sharply, or these things will be a net-negative development.