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

ChatGPT Plugins

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#681

Post by anonyfox »

tukantje wrote: post #671
anonyfox wrote: post #239

I have a feeling this will be an earth shattering moment in time, especially for us. Basically you can plug your business data into the Chatbot now, and ideally (or not far off) there is a transcational API call in the form of dialogue. Sound/Voice/Siri/whatever.... coming soon for more accessability and convenience. This will decimate frontend developers or at least change the way they provide value soon, and compan…

I definitely agree, although I wonder how to do a switch to stay relevant. Any ideas on that front?

Infrastructure engineering as a foundation, since all this stuff ultimately needs some hardware, that has to be provisioned. Not to speak of plumbing/wiring stuff together and things like security/compliance…

DevOps/Automation to get people (no matter if current devs or soon prompters) actually deliver things and/or speed up delivery/feedback loops.

I picked up both after having mastered frontend/backend stuff and getting bored… hope it holds in the coming future!

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#682

Post by guyomes »

AOsborn wrote: post #540
vineyardmike wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People said this about Alexa/Siri et al and it didn’t happen. ChatGPT is way better at understanding you, so that’s a big boost. It could be a great tool/assistant but it probably won’t replace apps. The problem with those other platforms that this doesn’t address include: - discoverability. How do you learn what features a service supports. On a GUI you can just see the buttons, but on a chat interface you have to a…

Good points - but I fundamentally disagree here. The whole ecosystem, culture and metaphor of having a 'device' with 'apps' is to enable access to a range of solutions to your various problems. This is all going to go away. Yes, there will always be exceptions and sometimes you need the physical features of the device - like for taking photos. Instead, you'll have one channel which can solve 95% of your issues - basi…

An interface based on voice only has an issue: people tend to not live alone. As children they live with their parents. As adult, many want to live with a significant other.

Having somebody else in the house speaking out loud each time they want infos from the internet could become annoying.

Apart from having a mind reading device, I don't see so far a solution to this problem better than text input with a physical keyboard or a virtual keyboard on the device.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#683

Post by int_19h »

pastor_bob wrote: post #158
capableweb wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, they are a company 100% focused on AI research and deployment, not website designers/developers/"webmasters".

That's not 100% true. They're focused on now selling a product and developing an ecosystem. They have basically a non-existent settings interface. You can't even change the email tied to the account or drop having to be logged into Google if you signed up with your Google account. I wish I had known how restrictive they are when I casually signed up last year.

Microsoft is the one packaging and selling it all as a polished product now.

It's just that things move so fast that all the fun is on the bleeding edge, so that's where people go if they have access, bugs and warts and all.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#684

Post by swyx »

hackerlight wrote: post #468
swyx wrote: post #213

i think people aren't appreciating it's ability to run -and execute- Python. IT RUNS FFMPEG https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1638971232443076609?s=20 IT RUNS FREAKING FFMPEG. inside CHATGPT. what. is. happening. ChatGPT is an AI compute platform now.

Your comment was read and summarized ChatGPT: https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1638986918947082241

I KNOW. AAAAAAAAAAAA

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#685

Post by swyx »

stevenhuang wrote: post #552
sho_hn wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next: 1. Prompt it to extract the audio track, then give it to a speech-to-text API, translate it to another language, then make it add it back to the video file as a subtitle track. 2. Retrain the model to where it does this implcitly when you say "hey can you add Portuguese subtitles to this for me"?

no retraining may be necessary, this is a common enough ffmpeg task I wouldn't be surprised it can do it right now as a one-shot prompt. what a time to be alive!

holding on to my papers fr fr

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#686

Post by AOsborn »

vineyardmike wrote: post #615
AOsborn wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good points - but I fundamentally disagree here. The whole ecosystem, culture and metaphor of having a 'device' with 'apps' is to enable access to a range of solutions to your various problems. This is all going to go away. Yes, there will always be exceptions and sometimes you need the physical features of the device - like for taking photos. Instead, you'll have one channel which can solve 95% of your issues - basi…

> Consider the friction when consumers grumble about streaming services fragmenting. They just want one. They don't want to subscribe to 5+. I think you just proved it won't happen anytime soon. Consumers obviously would prefer a "unified" interface. Yet we can't even get streaming services to all expose their libraries to a common UI - which is already built into Apple TV, fireTv, Roku, and Chromecast. Despite the f…

Great point about failure to unify (or intentionally preventing it).

The space is in a land-grab phase, where everyone wants to position themselves as the next Google, and control the channel.

Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#687

Post by scarface74 »

endisneigh wrote: post #651
scarface74 wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the fixed cost was huge, you would have point. But the variable costs are also huge. I’m sure the market is also huge for dollars sold for 95 cents.

it's really not that huge. unlike most companies, people are willing to pay if it's Apple. they can roll it into the iCloud subscription

That doesn’t help. You’re still making something that has a high variable cost into something that the user only is paying a fixed cost for.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#688

Post by dan_mctree »

riku_iki wrote: post #557
golol wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but they were fundamentally capable of the same things. This is not the case. The difference between current state of the art NLP and chatbots 3 years ago is so massive, it has to be seen as qualitative. Pre GPT-3 computers did not understand language and no commerical chatbot had any AI. Now computers can understand language.

> Now computers can understand language. "understand"

At this point ChatGPT is blowing our human ability to use language so far out of the water on so many levels, I'd argue we should start putting quotes around our human ability to "understand" language. GPT-4 has already eclipsed us when it comes to language

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#689

Post by rezonant »

qup wrote: post #332
chrispogeek wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning up to the "wrong" is good in my book

That's just some weird moral compass. It's almost totally irrelevant if people own up to bring wrong, particularly about predictions. I can't think of a benefit, really. You can learn from mistakes without owning up to them, and I think that's the best use of mistakes.

I think this is a terrible take. It is so intensely important that one can admit they were wrong when new information comes to light.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#690

Post by andsoitis »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #491
chatmasta wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…

> When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? Every time an IRB, ERB, IEC, or REB says no. Do you want an exact date and time? I'm sure it happens multiple times a day even.

> Do you want an exact date and time? I'm sure it happens multiple times a day even.

You should read "when in human history" in larger time scales than minutes, hours, and days. Furthermore, you should read it not as binary (no progress or all progress), but the general arc is technological progression.

Post reply on HN