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

OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

businesstoday.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 333 posts

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#161

Post by unshavedyak »

phailhaus wrote: post #64
mattferderer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dramatically improving my learning. The ability to ask questions & ask for examples has helped me learn far faster than books, videos, blogs, etc. Yes, I know the information isn't always 100% accurate. Neither are the books, blogs, courses, etc., I pay for. They also don't let me ask "what about this scenario..." This gives me such a strong base to build from which I can then use other sources to verify.

> Yes, I know the information isn't always 100% accurate. Neither are the books, blogs, courses, etc., I pay for Those are two completely different things. ChatGPT has no obligation to be correct, and isn't even trying! It is a chatbot. Its prime directive is only to sound believable . Those books, blogs, courses, etc are at least trying to be correct and provide you with reliable information on a topic. Try using Ch…

I did, and it was wrong in subtle ways for sure.. but honestly, it was right enough that i was really impressed.

Like i think if you're aware that it can be confidently wrong then it can help you explore areas you don't know.

To think of it differently it felt like learning via comments on Reddit. Which is to say a large portion of Reddit posts are shockingly confidently wrong. But with ChatGPT you can inspect those "comments", ask from various angles, etc.

I have this feeling that ChatGPT could, even in its current form, be useful for learning the larger complex picture. Very bad at reciting facts definitely, but ideas maybe not so bad.

Either way i'm still wanting it to improve. But i still think it's shockingly impressive. I will be paying happily if they can make "small" improvements to how it understands information.

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#162

Post by ben_w »

nszceta wrote: post #137
Eextra953 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You very clearly do, otherwise why would you throw "social justice warriors" into an a thread about a chatbots premium service?

It is obvious that many consumer facing online applications have gotten into hot water regularly for social justice issues in the past decade.

That comment is an example of following a narrative.

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#163

Post by tux3 »

phailhaus wrote: post #64
mattferderer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dramatically improving my learning. The ability to ask questions & ask for examples has helped me learn far faster than books, videos, blogs, etc. Yes, I know the information isn't always 100% accurate. Neither are the books, blogs, courses, etc., I pay for. They also don't let me ask "what about this scenario..." This gives me such a strong base to build from which I can then use other sources to verify.

> Yes, I know the information isn't always 100% accurate. Neither are the books, blogs, courses, etc., I pay for Those are two completely different things. ChatGPT has no obligation to be correct, and isn't even trying! It is a chatbot. Its prime directive is only to sound believable . Those books, blogs, courses, etc are at least trying to be correct and provide you with reliable information on a topic. Try using Ch…

>Those books, blogs, courses, etc are at least trying to be correct and provide you with reliable information on a topic.

On topics I know really well, ChatGPT is wrong more often that courses, blogs, books, etc. However, I don't think it's prudent to put them in two different categories, where human books are reliable and LLM answers aren't. Both make many mistakes, with a difference in degree that currently favors human books, but without either really being in a different category.

Newly published books (let alone blogs) are frequently less reliable than even Wikipedia. They are written by a handful of authors at most, get a limited period of review, and the first edition is then unleashed upon unsuspecting students until the errata list grows long enough that a 4th edition is needed.

The prime directive for LLMs with RLHF is a combination of giving the answer that best completes the prompt, and giving the answer people want to hear. The prime directive for authors is a combination of selling a lot of books, not expending so much time and energy writing the book that it won't be profitable, and not making so many mistakes that it damages their reputation.

Neither books, blogs, nor ChatGPT have any obligation to be correct. Either way, the content being reinforced (whether through money, or through training) is not The Truth straight from the Platonic Realm, but whatever the readers consider themselves satisfied with.

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#165

Post by verelo »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #143
verelo wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want personas. Your racist uncle, my woke sister, your on the fence father, and my happy mother. The reality is these each will answer questions in totally different ways, lies will dramatically vary and as much as it’s kind of weird to say it, i think this could turn out to be practical.

You're Jack's grammar pedantic brother.

Haha I’ve been called worse

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#166

Post by phillipcarter »

Kerrick wrote: post #152
bilsbie wrote: post #32

My son asked if which of two animals would win in a fight and we just got a lecture about how fighting is bad. I hope they’ll give an option to turn off what I’m calling “hall monitor mode” That could be worth paying for.

That seems especially egregious since that's the premise of a (rather neat) series of children's books. https://www.scholastic.com/parents/books-and-reading/book-li...

There’s nothing egregious about a company putting in guards to protect against liability, even if they seem cruse to you.

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#167

Post by CyanBird »

spiderice wrote: post #136
femiagbabiaka wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a counterpoint, I’m so glad that OpenAI has such stringent ethics policies, it’s like a miracle that the company to make such breakthroughs is actually responsible given the craven behavior of most companies and engineers by extension.

It's ok if you need a corporation to babysit you if you don't trust your own ethics. You don't need to force your ethics on others though. Make it optional.

The optionality comes from you making your own company and doing wherever rules you want for it, openai needs to ensure that they don't suffer backlash from any angle, as the investing companies don't want/need to deal with these kinds of problems themselves, their objective is to maximize revenue and profits, not fulfill wherever rando questions you have

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#168

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

BoxOfRain wrote: post #61
bilsbie wrote: post #32

My son asked if which of two animals would win in a fight and we just got a lecture about how fighting is bad. I hope they’ll give an option to turn off what I’m calling “hall monitor mode” That could be worth paying for.

Yeah I'd happily pay decent money for a version that wasn't a fun sponge who'd probably remind the teacher they hadn't set any homework at the end of the lesson. I think its 'moral compass' is a bit Americentric too, it would be nice if its sense of what is proper could be customised for different countries.

Same here... but the puritan AI ethicists on Twitter are asking for even more self-censorship. Because there are ways to making it say racist things if you explicitly tell it to do so. As is normal, given that it's just a tool, the point is that it should do what we say. I guess for these people, high-school debates where one can be assigned racist/sexist/etc. positions are an abomination.

I hope some non-American equivalent is released, because I don't trust American companies to release anything not absurdly prude. American society (or at least the elites) seems totally engulfed by extreme puritanism, and happy to impose it on the rest of us (why can't we have porn apps on the iPhone, when there's porn made by perfectly legal companies who pay their workers and their taxes?)

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#169

Post by verelo »

ben_w wrote: post #144
verelo wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want personas. Your racist uncle, my woke sister, your on the fence father, and my happy mother. The reality is these each will answer questions in totally different ways, lies will dramatically vary and as much as it’s kind of weird to say it, i think this could turn out to be practical.

It already does that, that was something like the 3rd or 4th thing people tried to get past the guide rails they put in to prevent a repeat of Microsoft Tay. Even if they're actively preventing the uncle, personas can be used to improve the accuracy (or just change the attitude and framing) of the responses, e.g. "You are a maths professor who always answers with careful well-thought out logic. You are prompted with:…

It kind of does with the prompts but i feel that this is actually a higher level config of some kind. The idea that you can encompass a personality in a prompt of 4K tokens and leave room for the reply really underestimates how complex personalities could be, imo.

Re: OpenAI starts testing ChatGPT premium

#170

Post by CyanBird »

SamBam wrote: post #104
FamosoRandom wrote: post #53

They can monetize it if they want, but I just want it to not be as bad as DALL-E 2. When using an AI, it's not unusual to have to tinker a bit to get exactly what you want from it. Today, DALL-E cost 15$ to use it 115 times, but 90% of the time you don't really get good images, or necessarily exactly what you want. it means that you're actually paying 15$ for 10 or something image that are actually what you wanted. I…

> Today, DALL-E cost 15$ to use it 115 times, but 90% of the time you don't really get good images, or necessarily exactly what you want. So you're paying $15 to get 11 great images that are what you want? That still seems pretty cheap. The point is, the cost includes the failed images. If you wanted the cost to only be for the good images, and you get free bad images, they'd simply charge 10x the amount.

> So you're paying $15 to get 11 great images that are what you want? That still seems pretty cheap

It isn't, stable diffusion + anything v3 or protogen is free

Midjourney costs 10usd/month for iirc nearly 2 hours of gpu time and is better than dalle

Post reply on HN