5 ms·

I think a personal subscription model where ChatGPT Plus subscribers are given personal API access for use with third-party open source apps (e.g., Chrome exten

I think a personal subscription model where ChatGPT Plus subscribers are given personal API access for use with third-party open source apps (e.g., Chrome extensions, Siri Shortcuts, VSCode extensions) would be extremely valuable and much more lucrative than selling to specific companies. OpenAI has the opportunity to become the next fundamental utility provider for society. In the same way everybody has a data plan to make their apps work, in the future everybody could have an OpenAI subscription to enable advanced capabilities across their apps. A system where individual companies pay for access makes many of the most incredible use-cases economically infeasible. Future children will grow up oblivious to their AI subscription in the same way current children are oblivious to the ramifications of their internet subscriptions. We are going through the AOL stage again.

la64710 4y ago
As far ChatGPT is concerned they certainly have the first movers advantage but I doubt if this wil last long. Now if I get a busy can’t talk from dear old chatGPT I just shuffle over to https://you.com/search?q=who+are+you&tbm=youchat&cfr=chat https://you.com/search?q=who+are+you&tbm=youchat&cfr=chat
- 40four 4y ago
  I didn’t know about you.com, good recommendation thanks!
fragmede 4y ago
Selling SaaS services B2B vs B2C is a large topic, and which one's more lucrative for OpenAI is hard to pin down. How many individuals do you know pay for Google Workspaces or Office365, vs how many companies pay for it? Or how about GitHub CoPilot? Or Trello? Obviously those are different products which makes direct comparison hard, but people don't pay for things, that's why there's stealing, and why so many things are ad-supported or ad-"enhanced". We are in the midst of tech giants fighting, with the consumer as the loser. (Quick, try and buy a book in the Kindle app on iOS!) I don't see a future where it's possible to run (whatever evolves into being) speech ChatGPT on an Apple device with Apple support.
jmfldn 4y ago
I don't mind paying for AI services, but I want it to be transparent. I want to see the source code, the training data and so on. What I'm paying for should be the massive compute infrastructure needed to train and maintain the model, but something like this is way too important and powerful to be a 'blackbox' SAAS product. If we think we have problems with Facebook or Google's hold over us, this has the potential to be much much worse if we get the design of the products and the business models wrong.
- visarga 4y ago
  StabilityAI's solution to provide base models everyone can fine-tune seems more useful. APIs are too restrictive and expensive.
  - jmfldn 4y ago
    Exactly. I see this being eclipsed by the Stable Diffusion equivalent for ChatGPT. You could then have cloud providers offering whatever specialised compute you need to easily run one of these as a server. Host your own instance in other words. Obviously a lot of people will just want a simple SAAS product still, we won't want or need everyone, hosting their own apps (too energy intensive for a start). This can then be a SAAS offering, but backed by the same open source software.
version_five 4y ago
I don't agree with you about how foundational this is, I think chatGPt (as a concept, not a given instantiaiton) is mostly a toy people will get bored with (and not a stepping stone to something more like AGI) But whether I'm wrong or not I'm very excited about the idea of a ground-up paid service like this that could potentially have a b2c business model based on people actually paying for it instead of being a product sold to advertisers. I hope we're at the beginning of a shift to widespread paid "information" products and away from the race to the bottom an ad-supported tech ecosystem has become Edited to be more precise
- _tom_ 4y ago
  > I think chatGPt is mostly a toy people will get bored with. I think that would be correct, if ChatGPT doesn't continue to improve. Given the rate of progress so far, most of us are expecting that there will be much more progress, and it will continue to add more value. This is where it becomes foundational. Or Skynet :-)
  - gtirloni 4y ago
    What are examples of that rate of progress? Are you talking about ChatGPT itself or the field?
    - _tom_ 4y ago
      Both. Everything around ai is moving incredibly fast.
      - gtirloni 4y ago
        Could you give some concrete examples in ChatGPT's? This field is very abstract to me.
- quacked 4y ago
  I think you're wrong, many programmers already prefer ChatGPT over StackOverflow.
rvz 4y ago
> OpenAI has the opportunity to become the next fundamental utility provider for society. In the same way everybody has a data plan to make their apps work, in the future everybody could have an OpenAI subscription to enable advanced capabilities across their apps. I don't think so. An open source competitor is OpenAI's worst nightmare. We have seen this with Stable Diffusion against DALL-E 2. So if a free open-source version of GPT-4 comes around and it is better than GPT-4, then OpenAI's moat is gone. There will always be competition and an open-source model will surely come on top, especially something like Stable Diffusion. > Future children will grow up oblivious to their AI subscription in the same way current children are oblivious to the ramifications of their internet subscriptions. I'm very sure 99.9% of people are aware that they need to pay for access the internet in their home. > We are going through the AOL stage again. I don't think an OpenAI subscription and a AOL subscription is even the same thing or even comparable.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

la64710 4y ago

As far ChatGPT is concerned they certainly have the first movers advantage but I doubt if this wil last long. Now if I get a busy can’t talk from dear old chatGPT I just shuffle over to https://you.com/search?q=who+are+you&tbm=youchat&cfr=chat https://you.com/search?q=who+are+you&tbm=youchat&cfr=chat

40four 4y ago
I didn’t know about you.com, good recommendation thanks!

fragmede 4y ago

Selling SaaS services B2B vs B2C is a large topic, and which one's more lucrative for OpenAI is hard to pin down. How many individuals do you know pay for Google Workspaces or Office365, vs how many companies pay for it? Or how about GitHub CoPilot? Or Trello? Obviously those are different products which makes direct comparison hard, but people don't pay for things, that's why there's stealing, and why so many things are ad-supported or ad-"enhanced". We are in the midst of tech giants fighting, with the consumer as the loser. (Quick, try and buy a book in the Kindle app on iOS!) I don't see a future where it's possible to run (whatever evolves into being) speech ChatGPT on an Apple device with Apple support.

jmfldn 4y ago

I don't mind paying for AI services, but I want it to be transparent. I want to see the source code, the training data and so on. What I'm paying for should be the massive compute infrastructure needed to train and maintain the model, but something like this is way too important and powerful to be a 'blackbox' SAAS product. If we think we have problems with Facebook or Google's hold over us, this has the potential to be much much worse if we get the design of the products and the business models wrong.

visarga 4y ago
StabilityAI's solution to provide base models everyone can fine-tune seems more useful. APIs are too restrictive and expensive.
- jmfldn 4y ago
  Exactly. I see this being eclipsed by the Stable Diffusion equivalent for ChatGPT. You could then have cloud providers offering whatever specialised compute you need to easily run one of these as a server. Host your own instance in other words. Obviously a lot of people will just want a simple SAAS product still, we won't want or need everyone, hosting their own apps (too energy intensive for a start). This can then be a SAAS offering, but backed by the same open source software.

version_five 4y ago

I don't agree with you about how foundational this is, I think chatGPt (as a concept, not a given instantiaiton) is mostly a toy people will get bored with (and not a stepping stone to something more like AGI) But whether I'm wrong or not I'm very excited about the idea of a ground-up paid service like this that could potentially have a b2c business model based on people actually paying for it instead of being a product sold to advertisers. I hope we're at the beginning of a shift to widespread paid "information" products and away from the race to the bottom an ad-supported tech ecosystem has become Edited to be more precise

_tom_ 4y ago
> I think chatGPt is mostly a toy people will get bored with. I think that would be correct, if ChatGPT doesn't continue to improve. Given the rate of progress so far, most of us are expecting that there will be much more progress, and it will continue to add more value. This is where it becomes foundational. Or Skynet :-)
- gtirloni 4y ago
  What are examples of that rate of progress? Are you talking about ChatGPT itself or the field?
  - _tom_ 4y ago
    Both. Everything around ai is moving incredibly fast.
    - gtirloni 4y ago
      Could you give some concrete examples in ChatGPT's? This field is very abstract to me.
quacked 4y ago
I think you're wrong, many programmers already prefer ChatGPT over StackOverflow.

rvz 4y ago

> OpenAI has the opportunity to become the next fundamental utility provider for society. In the same way everybody has a data plan to make their apps work, in the future everybody could have an OpenAI subscription to enable advanced capabilities across their apps. I don't think so. An open source competitor is OpenAI's worst nightmare. We have seen this with Stable Diffusion against DALL-E 2. So if a free open-source version of GPT-4 comes around and it is better than GPT-4, then OpenAI's moat is gone. There will always be competition and an open-source model will surely come on top, especially something like Stable Diffusion. > Future children will grow up oblivious to their AI subscription in the same way current children are oblivious to the ramifications of their internet subscriptions. I'm very sure 99.9% of people are aware that they need to pay for access the internet in their home. > We are going through the AOL stage again. I don't think an OpenAI subscription and a AOL subscription is even the same thing or even comparable.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]