331–340 of 696 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You stated that AI shouldn't be creating, because humans should be creating. Think about the motivations and implications for that for a minute.
No. I was much more specific with my statement. Your comments are based on your own extrapolation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I checked the price of a A100, and its costs 15k? Is that right?
And $2.25 per hour on 1 year reservation means 8,760 hours x 2.25 = $19,710 rent for the year. Not a bad yield for the provider at all, but makes sense given overheads and ROI expected.
Pricing is good because OpenAI does not need to make any money but needs data for feedback, if everyone switches to open source ( Llama etc. ) they won't get the data they need. Google is testing their system internally with XX thousand users, OpenAI with XXX million users ...
I think they are actually selling this service at a price point that is profitable.
> 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.…
For a three year reservation that comes to over $96k/yr - to support one concurrent request.
So, the Web3 won't be blockchains and whatnot: it's actually custom generated content. I... don't really like it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully there will be a plug-in-your-own-API-key open source thing then. Even better.
The future is now: gptask() { data=$(jq -n \ --arg message "$1" \ '{model: "gpt-3.5-turbo", max_tokens: 4000, messages: [{role: "user", content: $message}]}') response=$(curl -s https://api.openai.com/v1/chat/completions \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -H "Authorization: Bearer $OAIKEY" \ -d "$data") message=$(echo "$response" \ | jq '.choices[].message.content' \ | sed 's/^\"\\n\\n//;s/\"$//') echo -e "$mess…
I hope this pricing impacts ChatGPT+ $20 is equivalent to what, 10,000,000 tokens? At ~750 words/1k tokens, that’s 7.5 million words per month, or roughly 250,000 words per day, 10,416 words per hour, 173 words per minute, every minute, 24/7. I uh, do not have that big of a utilization need. It’s kind of weird to vastly overpay
Most of the value for me with ChatGPT+ is getting access when the system is at capacity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.…
It's also worth mentioning that, because Microsoft is an investor, they're likely getting these at cost or subsidized. OpenAI doesn't have to make money right away. They can lose a small bit of money per API request in exchange for market share (preventing others from disrupting them). As the cost of GPUs goes down, or they develop at ASIC or more efficient model, they can keep their pricing the same and then make mo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. I was much more specific with my statement. Your comments are based on your own extrapolation.
So, the same logic, in analogous domains, but once case good, the other case bad, because you prefer one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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”?
> 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”? I once visited Parler just to see what it was like, and pretty quickly found that the answer to your question seems to be yes. There are definitely people who feel they need that kind of dialog in their life. Y…