This is a just pricing experiment just to see if people will pay 10X more for better AI. Perhaps, eventually, we will be paying thousands per month for AI if it is good enough.
ChatGPT Pro
901–910 of 1001 posts
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#902I actually pay 166 Euros a month for Claude Teams. Five seats. And I only use one. For myself. Why do I pay so much? Because the normal paid version (20 USD a month) interrups the chats after a dozen questions and wants me to wait a few hours until I can use it again. But Teams plan gives me way more questions. But why do I pay that much? Because Claude in combination with the Projects feature, where I can upload two…
Why not use the API? You can ask as many questions as you can pay for.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#903I do wonder what effect this will have on furthering the divide between the "rich West" and the rest of the world. If everyone in the West has powerful AI and Agents to automate everything. Simply because we can afford it, but the rest of the world doesn't have access to it. What will that mean for everyone left behind?
Has it really made that much of a difference in the first place? I have a feeling that we'll look back in 10 years and not even notice the "AI revolution" on any charts of productivity, creating a productivity paradox 3.0.
I can imagine the headlines now: "AI promised unlimited productivity, 10 years later, we're still waiting for the rapture"
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#904OpenAI 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…
The "open source nature" this time is different. "Open source" models are not actually open source, in the sense that the community can't contribute to their development. At best they're just proprietary freeware. Thus, the continuity of "open source" models depends purely on how long their sponsors sustain funding. If Meta or Alibaba or Tencent decide tomorrow that they're no longer going to fund this stuff, then we're in real trouble, much more than when Red Hat drops the ball.
I'd say Meta is the most important player here. Pretty much all the "open source" models are built in Llama in one way or the other. The only reason Llama exists is because Meta wants to commoditize AI in order to prevent the likes of OpenAI from overtaking them later. If Meta one day no longer believes in this strategy for whatever reason, then everybody is in serious trouble.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#905Earlier quoted context omitted.
My 10th grade english teacher (2002, just as blogging was taking off) called it sloppy and I gotta agree with her. These days I see it as youtube punctuation, like jump cut editing for text.
How is it sloppy?
It's not. People just like to pretend they have moral superiority for their opinions on arbitrary writing rules, when in reality the only thing that matters is if you're clearly communicating something valuable.
I'm a professional writer and use em-dashes without a second thought. Like any other component of language, just don't _over_ use them.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#906OpenAI 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…
And the catch-up of logic clock, how fast people catch-up we don't have Skynet within 2 years, but a glorified google search for the next 20 years.
Am I the only one who's getting annoyed of seeing LLMs be marketed as competent search engines? That's not what they've been designed for, and they have been repeatedly bad at that.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#907Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ai is no where near the level of leaving behind those that aren't using it. Especially not at the individual consumer level like this.
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…
The anology I would use is extended phenotype evolution in digital space as Richard Dawkins would say. Just as crabs in oceans use shells to protect themselves.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#908I really want to know about their growth rate. Their valuation has already priced in several decades of insane profit, so I want to if they will be able to pull it off in a decade or two.
Re: ChatGPT Pro
#909Re: ChatGPT Pro
#910Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that OpenAI don't really have the enterprise market at all. Their APIs are closer in that many companies are using them to power features in other software, primarily Microsoft, but they're not the ones providing end user value to enterprises with APIs. As for ChatGPT, it's a consumer tool, not an enterprise tool. It's not really integrated into an enterprises' existing toolset, it's not integrated int…
ChatGPT does have an enterprise version. I've seen the enterprise version with a top-5 consulting company, and it answers from their global knowledgebase, cites references, and doesn't train on their data.
I assume top-5 consulting companies are buying to be on the bandwagon, but are the rank and file using it?