Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT Pro

openai.com

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#591

    > To highlight the main strength of o1 pro mode (improved reliability), we 
    > use a stricter evaluation setting: a model is only considered to solve a 
    > question if it gets the answer right in four out of four attempts ("4/4 
    > reliability"), not just one.
So, $200/mo. gets you less than 12.5% randomly wrong answers?

And $20/mo. gets you >25% randomly wrong answers?

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#592
post #567

Why doesn't Pro include longer context windows? I'm a Plus member, and the biggest limitation I am running into by far is the maximum length of a context window. I'm having context fall out of scope throughout the conversion or not being able to give it a large document that I can then interrogate. So if I go from paying $20/month for 32,000 tokens, to $200/month for Pro, I expect something more akin to Enterprise's…

If a $200/month pro level is successful it could open the door to a $2000/month segment, and the $20,000/month segment will appear and the segregation of getting ahead with AI will begin.

This is a significant concern for me too.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#594
post #572

OpenAI is racing against two clocks: the commoditization clock (how quickly open-source alternatives catch up) and the monetization clock (their need to generate substantial revenue to justify their valuation). The ultimate success of this strategy depends on what we might call the enterprise AI adoption curve - whether large organizations will prioritize the kind of integrated, reliable, and "safe" AI solutions Open…

I wonder if OpenAI can break into enterprise. I don’t see much of a path for them, at least here in the EU. Even if they do manage to build some sort of trust as far as data safety goes, and I’m not sure they’ll have much more luck with that than Facebook had trying to sell that corporate thing they did (still do?). But if they did, they will still be facing the very real issue of having to compete with Microsoft. I…

[dead]

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#595

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…

That's encouraging to hear that it's a better writer, but I wonder if "quirks and tells" can only be seen in hindsight. o1-pro's quirks may only become apparent after enough people have flooded the internet with its output.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#596
post #567

Why doesn't Pro include longer context windows? I'm a Plus member, and the biggest limitation I am running into by far is the maximum length of a context window. I'm having context fall out of scope throughout the conversion or not being able to give it a large document that I can then interrogate. So if I go from paying $20/month for 32,000 tokens, to $200/month for Pro, I expect something more akin to Enterprise's…

If a $200/month pro level is successful it could open the door to a $2000/month segment, and the $20,000/month segment will appear and the segregation of getting ahead with AI will begin.

Agreed. Where may I read about how to set up an LLM similar to that of Claude, which has the minimum length of Claude's context window, and what are the hardware requirements? I found Claude incredibly useful.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#597
post #442
post #75

[flagged]

> In other words, it's a con. Such a silly conclusion to draw based on a gut feeling, and to see all comments piggyback on it like it's a given feels like I'm going crazy. How can you all be so certain?

You don't have to be certain to be skeptical. But you should definitely be certain before you buy.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#598

Earlier 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?”

I recently saw someone revise for a test by asking chatgpt to create practice questions for them on the topics they were revising. I know other people who use it to practice chatting in a foreign language they are trying to learn.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#599

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…

I use the emdash a lot. Maybe too much. On MacOS, it's so easy to type—just press shift-option-minus—that I don't even think about it anymore!

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#600
post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how pricing works. If o1-pro is 10% better than Claude, but you are a guy who makes $300,000 per year, but now can make $330,000 because o1-pro makes you more productive, then it makes sense to give Sam $2,400.

I love it when AI bros quantify AI's helpfulness like this

Being in an AI domain does not invalidate the fundamental logic. If an expensive tool can make you productive enough to offset the cost, then the tool is worth it for all intents and purposes.
Post reply on HN