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

A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

policykahani.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 107 posts

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#81

Post by Smeevy »

xvector wrote: post #45
niek_pas wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is making a moral argument, not a practical (from Google’s perspective) one.

I feel like this is a huge problem with the progressive movement in the US. Morally sound arguments that rarely make practical or economic sense - and no, "tax the rich" doesn't get us there: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/ten-myths-about-the-u-s-tax...

That's not an unfair assessment, but I would pose additional questions:

Why does doing the morally sound thing always have to be easier, better, and cheaper than ruining the world and creating human misery? Why must the morally superior argument be financially unassailable?

I'm getting older and angrier and I've grown tired of meeting greedy, disingenuous adversaries halfway just to have my hand slapped away after they get what they want. Since we've established that conservatives will absolutely put up with pain to harm outgroup bogeymen, I don't listen to their appeals for things that I hope will reduce human misery in the world.

With that in mind: Tax the rich like it's the 1950s, healthcare for all, stop burning fossil fuels, etc. Do it all and see what works, darn it.

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#82

Post by lxgr »

This argument would make more sense if machine learning inference had zero (or close to it) marginal cost, which is the case for intellectual property among other things.

However, inference infrastructure is anything but free, and I'd estimate that cost to currently dominate the fraction of dollar per token.

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#83

Post by Mars008 »

alightsoul wrote: post #38
sebzim4500 wrote: post #19

>I find this very troubling for two reasons. First, while Claude and OpenAI are new, Google has been around for a long time. It should have thought better about pricing so that the tool is within the reach of the developing world. Why? I don't see a practical argument for why Google would want to offer this service at a massive loss.

Well, this will only increase immigration. Isn't this what the US doesn't want?

US doesn't want gov debt even more. (not under dems ruling like last 4 year)

Money don't grow on the trees. Someone has to work or take debt. The question is should rich countries sponsor poor? Probably yes. How much? Trump decided enough is enough. EU want US to keep sponsoring the war. You know, they want it to continue but don't want to pay for it. So they try to hijack US government again by attacking Trump personally.

Immigration can be solved by border control. That's what dems fought so hard against trying to get more voters in. Another reason: they control food distribution.

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#84

Post by Mars008 »

alightsoul wrote: post #39
EbNar wrote: post #5

Luckily, a ChatGPT Pro subscription is not mandatory. It's not like one can't live without it.

for now. Wait until you have to compete with those who do have it. It's like competing in a race with a ferrari without a race car. The same thing used to be said of the internet.

That can be said about any infrastructure element. AI becomes one of them along with roads, telephones, electricity, etc. Should rich sponsor all of it to make poor around the world competitive? There are charities for this. Actually it's more complicated. The idea of world wide taxes was around for years.

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#85

Post by int3 »

alightsoul wrote: post #60
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not when US work visas are so hard to get. And probably you'd wan to import smart people who can think beyond ChatGPT.

They don't get work visas, they start businesses even illegally. Or they could just use a Chinese model. Either way this is a losing proposiion for the US.

well, maybe we can spend some of the money we save not subsidizing the third world on better border security

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#88

Post by e3bc54b2 »

general1726 wrote: post #75

If 200 USD / month would replace a developer, then it would be a bargain. If 2000 USD / month would replace a developer, then it would be a fair price. Problem is that none of existing models are capable to replace a developer. They all need babysitting. And I am saying that as a probable customer who would actually pay something between 200-2000USD for AI junior developer which can actually work and understand what…

The morons who want to replace developers with these so called tools already feel like developers need babysitting. Partly because they suck at giving requirements or sticking to them or both. It will be fun to see them finding out the devs do more that bashing code.

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#89

Post by jama211 »

siva7 wrote: post #80

This has the to be the dumbest blog and argumentation i've read the whole year... Corporations aren't charities. A ChatGPT Pro subscription isn't necessary for human survival in those countries. A ChatGPT Pro subscription isn't necessary for basic human needs.

I thought it was about comparing the equivalent labor you could hire instead of buying a subscription perhaps

Re: A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries

#90

Post by jama211 »

thefz wrote: post #79
alightsoul wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for now. Wait until you have to compete with those who do have it. It's like competing in a race with a ferrari without a race car. The same thing used to be said of the internet.

Why? Will you have access to it during an exam? During an interview? Can't you pass a calculus exam without it?

I can think of a few job related reasons you’d use it, you know, to make money. If those few specific ones you mentioned are all you can think of then…
Post reply on HN