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

ChatGPT for Teams

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 453 posts

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#331

Post by mikepurvis »

wand3r wrote: post #327

Adjacent question, leaving aside value proposition. Do companies pay for 1000 seats like this? I didn't realize slack is $5 a user a month. Do they discount this for bulk, or are companies paying $5k/month $60k/yearly? These subscriptions must really add up. On All In, they discussed the leverage from AI tools and they probably also meant open source, but one of the companies just rolled their own instance of a big m…

I'm not really in the know, but I bet the enterprise discounts don't kick in until you're at the tens of thousands of users. In any case, $60k sounds like a lot as a top-line figure to some bean-counter, but all these sales pitches follow the same basic pattern:

- This is an essential, best-in-class tool. You wouldn't deny your employees a laptop or a free lunch, would you?

- $5/user/mo is a bargain compared to the hassle of building/hosting this yourself, punching holes in your firewall every time you need to receive a webhook, dealing with security and auth issues.

- $60k is half the cost of someone you don't need to hire on your in-house IT team. Does it make sense yet?

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#332

Post by nathancahill »

F7F7F7 wrote: post #290
justincormack wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK stopped capitalising every word in headlines back in the 1980s maybe earlier. It looks much nicer and is more readable. The bold tells you it is a geadline. US newspaper graphic design seems very retro to me.

The majority of designers I know prefer tile case. Whether it’s a printed poster or in-app UI. Look no further than “Add Comment” at the top of this page.

What? It says "add comment"

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#333

Post by [deleted] »

lwhi wrote: post #197
shrx wrote: post #142

Could a moderator change the "Teams" in the title to lowercase (as it is in the article)? Capitalizing Teams misleadingly implies it's regarding Microsoft's chat platform.

I disagree. We shouldn't assume a basic sentence capitalised word refers to a product. If a reference to a product is intended, we should clarify that association some other way; i.e. MS Teams.

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#334

Post by LordDragonfang »

jasode wrote: post #310
diggan wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title on the submitted webpage is "ChatGPT Team", singular.

>The title on the submitted webpage is "ChatGPT Team", singular. Your reply is adding more confusion. The "ChatGPT Team" is the title of the webpage from a user comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38942936 (The capitalized "Team" is part of a Branded Product Name.) The "ChatGPT for teams" (lowercase 't' ) is the actual original title of the submitted webpage for the whole thread: https://openai.com/chatgpt/…

>"ChatGPT Team" is the title of the webpage from a user comment... "ChatGPT for teams" (lowercase 't') is the actual original title of the submitted webpage

Sorry, I think you're the one adding confusion.

"ChatGPT for teams" is not the title of the submitted webpage. It's the heading of the article on that page, but the actual title, as shown in the tab strip and defined in the html header, is "ChatGPT Team":

   view-source:https://openai.com/chatgpt/team
Hacker New's code uses the html title element (which in this case is actually a meta element) to automatically title submissions.

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#335

Post by [deleted] »

shrx wrote: post #142

Could a moderator change the "Teams" in the title to lowercase (as it is in the article)? Capitalizing Teams misleadingly implies it's regarding Microsoft's chat platform.

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#336

Post by [deleted] »

benreesman wrote: post #66

I’ve got my stuff rigged to hit mixtral-8x7, and dolphin locally, and 3.5-turbo, and the 4-series preview all with easy comparison in emacs and stuff, and in fairness the 4.5-preview is starting to show some edge on 8x7 that had been a toss-up even two weeks ago. I’m still on the mistral-medium waiting list. Until I realized Perplexity will give you a decent amount of Mistral Medium for free through their partnership…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#337

Post by yashap »

benreesman wrote: post #243
vincentrolfs wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I asked ChatGPT to rewrite the original post using your glossary, which worked well: I've set up my system to use several AI models: the open-source Mixtral-8x7, Dolphin (an uncensored version of Mixtral), GPT-3.5 Turbo (a cost-effective option from OpenAI), and the latest GPT-4 Turbo from OpenAI. I can easily compare their performances in Emacs. Lately, I've noticed that GPT-4 Turbo is starting to outperform Mixtral…

The GP did a great job summarizing the original post and defining a lot of cryptic jargon that I didn't anticipate would generate so much conversation, and I'd wager did it without a blind LLM shot (though these days even that is possible). I endorse that summary without reservation. And the above is substantially what I said, and undoubtedly would find a better reception with a larger audience. I'm troubled though,…

Personally I had no problem with your post being too abrasive or anything like that, it was just hard to understand because it was full of jargon.

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#338

Post by athyuttamre »

econner wrote: post #270

Our team has an Enterprise account, but individuals cannot access GPT-4 through the chat.openai.com interface. With teams, do individuals get access to GPT-4 through that interface? Is our account just broken somehow? It seems odd we have enterprise but cannot access GPT-4 through the main ChatGPT interface.

Do you have a ChatGPT Enterprise subscription purchased via our sales team? Or are you an API customer?

The former should have GPT-4 access; if not, that’s a bug, and I can look into it if you email me at atty@openai.com.

The API and ChatGPT are separate products, and usage or credits purchased for the API do not provide paid ChatGPT access.

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#339

Post by dvngnt_ »

ParetoOptimal wrote: post #306
minimaxir wrote: post #12

A notable feature here is "no training on your business data or conversations" which really shouldn't have to be a feature. (requests using the ChatGPT API already aren't trained upon)

Does anyone really trust openai isn't training on their data given their views on copyright? It would make more sense for them to just train on it anyway.

if there EULA says one thing and they do another that opens them up to huge liabilities. though anything is possible

Re: ChatGPT for Teams

#340

Post by ics »

Zambyte wrote: post #315
lhnz wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want my family to know I spent 3 hours chatting about the Holy Roman Empire.

What would change if they knew?

Too much discussion about the Holy Roman Empire over dinner? People talk to get things of their mind sometimes, not the infinite pursuit of conversation.
Post reply on HN