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

ChatGPT Pro

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#431

Post by gist »

pentagrama wrote: post #329

The argument of more compute power for this plan can be true, but this is also a pricing tactic known as the decoy effect or anchoring. Here's how it works: 1. A company introduces a high-priced option (the "decoy"), often not intended to be the best value for most customers. 2. This premium option makes the other plans seem like better deals in comparison, nudging customers toward the one the company actually wants…

An example of this is something I learned from a former employee who went to work for Encyclopedia Brittanica 'back in the day'. I actually invited the former employee to come back to our office so I could understand and learn from exactly what he had been taught (noting of course this was back before the internet obviously where info like that was not as available...)

So they charge (as I recall from what he told me I could be off) something like $450 for shipping the books (don't recall the actual amount but it seemed high at the time).

So the salesman is taught to start off the sales pitch with a set of encylopedia's costing at the time let's say $40,000 some 'gold plated version'.

The potential buyer laughs and then salesman then says 'plus $450 for shipping!!!'.

They then move on to the more reasonable versions costing let's say $1000 or whatever.

As a result of the first example of high priced the customer (in addition to the positioning you are talking about) the customer is setup to accept the shipping charge (which was relatively high).

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#432

Post by suddenlybananas »

bearjaws wrote: post #374
warkanlock wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question: Who earns (other than C-level) $150 an hour in a sane (non-US) world?

US salaries are sane when compared to what value people produce for their companies. Many argue they are too low.

[dead]

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#433

Post by rahimnathwani »

A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #407

I just bought a pro subscription. First impressions: The new o1-Pro model is an insanely good writer. Aside from favoring the long em-dash (—) which isn't on most keyboards, it has none of the quirks and tells of old GPT-4/4o/o1. It managed to totally fool every "AI writing detector" I ran it through. It can handle unusually long prompts. It appears to be very good at complex data analysis. I need to put it through i…

Would you mind sharing any favourite example chats?

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#434

Post by pizza »

vunderba wrote: post #315
JCharante wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's literally the cost of a cup per coffee per day

Not to be glib, but where do you live such that a single cup of coffee runs you seven USD? Just to put that into perspective. I also really don't find comparisons like this to be that useful. Any subscription can be converted into an exchange rate of coffee, or meals. So what?

You're right - at my coffee shop a cup of coffee is nine

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#435

Post by ruszki »

knowsuchagency wrote: post #419
ruszki wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If somebody claims that something can be done with LLM in 10 minutes which takes 4.5 hours for them, then they are definitely not experts. They probably have some surface knowledge, but that’s all. There is a reason why the better LLM demos are related to learn something new, like a new programming language. So far, all of the other kind of demos which I saw (e.g. generating new endpoints based on older ones) were cl…

No true Scotsman

There was no counter example, and I didn’t use any definition, so it cannot be that. I have no idea what you mean.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#436

Post by mrandish »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #348
lm28469 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can kill any profit margins for the product as a whole. Especially when the base line profit margin is negative to begin with

Is there any evidence to suggest this is true? IIRC there was leaked information that OpenAI's revenue was significantly higher than their compute spending, but it wasn't broken down between API and subscriptions so maybe that's just due to people who subscribe and then use it a few times a month.

> OpenAI's revenue was significantly higher than their compute spending

I find this difficult believe, although I don't doubt leaks could have implied it. The challenge is that "the cost of compute" can vary greatly based on how it's accounted for (things like amortization, revenue recognition, capex vs opex, IP attribution, leasing, etc). Sort of like how Hollywood studio accounting can show a movie as profitable or unprofitable, depending on how "profit" is defined and how expenses are treated.

Given how much all those details can impact the outcome, to be credible I'd need a lot more specifics than a typical leak includes.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#437

Post by torginus »

Sorry for the pie in the sky question, but how far away are we from prompting the AI with 'make me a new OS' and it just going away and doing it?

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#438

Post by tptacek »

yosito wrote: post #75

[flagged]

Is it insane? It's the cost of a new laptop every year. There are about as many people who won't blink at that among practitioners in our field as people who will.

I think the ship has sailed on whether GPT is useful or a con; I've lost track of people telling me it's their first search now rather than Google.

I'd encourage skeptics who haven't read this yet to check out Nicholas' post here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41150317

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#440

Post by bowsamic »

fzeindl wrote: post #232
yosito wrote: post #75

[flagged]

> After awhile, I started realizing that these mistakes are present in almost all topics. A fun question I tried a couple of times is asking it to give me a list with famous talks about a topic. Or a list of famous software engineers and the topics they work on. A couple of names typically exist but many names and basically all talks are shamelessly made up.

Whenever I’ve used ChatGPT for this exact thing it has been very accurate and didn’t make up anyone
Post reply on HN