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

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#941

Post by paradite »

throwup238 wrote: post #937
paradite wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to use API and 3rd party UI if usage limit is your concern?

I was using aider last night and ran up a $10 bill within two hours using o1 as the architect and Sonnet as the editor. It’s really easy to blow through $200 a month and o1-pro isn’t available in the API as far as I can tell.

Aider / Cline are known to eat tokens for lunch, because of the large context and system prompts they use.

The tool that I built doesn't have this problem, I haven't exceed $10/month on Claude 3.5 Sonnet. You can give it a try: https://prompt.16x.engineer/

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#942

Post by alphan0n »

stanford_labrat wrote: post #929
apugoneappu wrote: post #895

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 recently (in the last month) asked ChatGPT to cite its sources for some scientific data. It gave me completely made up, entirely fabricated citations for academic papers that did not exist.

Share a link to the conversation.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#943

Post by carbine »

submeta wrote: post #394

I 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…

I have ChatGPT ($20/month tier) and Claude and I absolutely see this use case. Claude is great but I love long threads where I can have it help me with a series of related problems over the course of a day. I'm rarely doing a one-shot. Hitting the limits is super frustrating.

So I understand the unlimited use case and honestly am considering shelling out for the o1 unlimited tier, if o1 is useful enough.

A theoretical app subscription for $200/month feels expensive. Having the equivalent a smart employee work beside me all day for $200/month feels like a deal.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#944

Post by HDThoreaun »

echelon wrote: post #910
apugoneappu wrote: post #895

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

In my experience consultants are using an absolute ton of chatGPT

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#945

Post by riazrizvi »

mordae wrote: post #847
blharr wrote: post #845

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad I'm not the only one. I see 4o as a lot more of a sidegrade. At this point I mix them up and I legitimately can't tell, sometimes I get bad responses from 4, sometimes 4o. Responses from gpt-4 sound more like AI, but I haven't had seemingly as many issues as with 4o. Also the feature of 4o where it just spits out a ton of information, or rewrites the entire code is frustrating

GPT-4o just fails to follow instructions and starts looping for me. Sonnet 3.5 never does.

Yes the looping. They should make and sell a squishy mascot you could order, something in the style of Clippy, so that when it loops, I could pluck it off my monitor and punch it in the face.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#946

Post by kaechle »

fenomas wrote: post #638
CharlieDigital wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Startup I'm at has generated a LOT of content using LLMs and once you've reviewed enough of the output, you can easily see specific patterns in the output. Some words/phrases that, by default, it overuses: "dive into", "delve into", "the world of", and others. You correct it with instructions, but it will then find synonyms so there is also a structural pattern to the output that it favors by default. For example, if…

> if we tell it "Don't start your writing with 'dive into'", it will just switch to "delve into" or another synonym. LLMs can radically change their style, you just have to specify what style you want. I mean, if you prompt it to "write in the style of an angry Charles Bukowski" you'll stop seeing those patterns you're used to. In my team for a while we had a bot generating meeting notes "in the style of a bored teen…

This is the way. Blending two or more styles also works well, especially if they're on opposite poles, e.g. "write like the imaginary lovechild of Cormac McCarthy and Ernest Hemingway."

Also, wouldn't angry Charles Bukowski just be ... Charles Bukowski?

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#947

Post by dtagames »

jijji wrote: post #920
fudged71 wrote: post #443

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…

What ever happened to IBM Watson? IBM wishes it would have taken off like ChatGPT

Watson was a pre-LLM technology, an evolution of IBM's experience with the expert systems which they believed would rule the roost in AI -- until transformers blew all that away.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#948

Post by dartos »

echelon wrote: post #910
apugoneappu wrote: post #895

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

YMMV wrt your experience and luck.

I’m a pretty experienced developer and I struggle to get any useful information out of LLMs for any non-trivial task.

At my job (at an LLM-based search company) our CTO uses it on occasion (I can tell by the contortions in his AI code that isn’t present in his handwritten code. I rarely need to fix the former)

And I think our interns used it for a demo one week, but I don’t think it’s very common at my company.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#949

Post by dartos »

jey wrote: post #655
informal007 wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This remind me why enterprise don't integrated OpenAI product into existing toolset, trust is root reason. It's hard to provide trust to OpenAI that they won't steal data of enterprise to train next model in a market where content is the most valuable element, compared office, cloud database, etc.

This is what the Azure OpenAI offering is supposed to solve, right?

Sort of?

Then there’s trust that it won’t make up information.

It probably won’t be used for any HR/legal work for fear of false info being generated.

Re: ChatGPT Pro

#950

Post by dSebastien »

gandalfgreybeer wrote: post #715
mtlynch wrote: post #664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kagi Ultimate (US$25/mo) includes unlimited use of all the Anthropic models. Full disclosure: I participated in Kagi's crowdfund, so I have some financial stake in the company, but I mainly participated because I'm an enthusiastic customer.

> Kagi Ultimate (US$25/mo) includes unlimited use of all the Anthropic models. What am I losing here if I switch over to this from my current Claude subscription?

You'll also lose the opportunity to use the MCP integration of Claude Desktop. It's still early on but this has huge potential
Post reply on HN