10 ms·

"Open - for some definition of open" AI Prepare to open your wallet each time you use it.

by naranha 4y ago

zamnos 4y ago
Unless you're in an impoverished part of the world, $20/month seems pretty friggin cheap (for user-level access) to me.
- manuelmoreale 4y ago
  It really isn't. Even in parts of the world that are definitely not impoverished. 20$/month would place it almost at the top of the most expensive subscriptions I have and I live in Italy.
  - zamnos 4y ago
    I'm sure your housing, food, possibility car subscription are far more expensive. :)
    - rany_ 4y ago
      Did you actually just compare essentials with a ChatGPT subscription? You're beyond disconnected....
      - burnished 4y ago
        Seems fair to gently challenge OPs top level proclamation.
        smaudet 4y ago
        To gently challenge your acceptance of an absurd, disconnected "challenge" - When every service starts pushing 20$ subscription fees onto their service to support their backend usage(s) of these services (in a desperate attempt to remain relevant in a global recession), then every service becomes base + 20$ cost. Tabulate various "services", e.g. netflix, disney+, mail-order subscription(s), lets say two or three, this quickly tabulates to 200$ per month (30 + 30 + 30 + 30 + 30 ~= 150, don't forget shipping and taxes). On a 6 figure salary, that's chump change. On a "above minimum wage" salary, you are lucky to have 20$ a month in spare change. In a world where most jobs have disappeared, your 1500$+ rent and 800$+ month becomes suddenly unaffordable for most people, and as most people are unable to pay, rent/subscription prices rise even more. "Open" AI is truly a disaster in the making, in every possible way.
        edgyquant 4y ago
        20$ is for an individual to have unlimited access to a chat form, not the cost for a scaled up business (which would definitely pay per request.)
      - zamnos 4y ago
        Lol and with the immediate downvotes I got for pointing that out say the masses agree with you. I mean look, I get it, if you're in an industry where ChatGPT isn't immediately useful (it's shit at hard-level leet code questions; it's a hosted solution so your company's IT policies should be stopping you from submitting proprietary data to it, and so on) then all the hype is unjustified. But where this thing is already banging out emails way faster than an unassisted human, it's already essential and companies that don't raise their productivty-per-employee are going to get left behind. If I said Internet access was an essential (especially here) few would disagree with me. But is it really? It's only existed for a few decades, all of humanity lived many, many fulfilling lives so it seems it shouldn't be, but here we are.
        wizzwizz4 4y ago
        > But where this thing is already banging out emails way faster than an unassisted human, … your system is completely broken. Emails are for communicating between people: if they're not being used for that, you need to fix that problem first. > companies that don't raise their productivty-per-employee are going to get left behind Can you give an example of a field where this would actually happen?
        zamnos 4y ago
        > … your system is completely broken. Emails are for communicating between people: if they're not being used for that, you need to fix that problem first. Can you explain a bit more? I don't think I'm understanding your point. If person A writing emails, to be read by the human that receives it, is able to write 3 emails an hour, vs person B writing 9 emails each of similar complexity to those 3 per hour, person B is 3x as productive, delivers 3x the value to the company and ChatGPT is easily worth $20/hour to both them and the company. > Can you give an example of a field where this would actually happen? From the end of January, ChatGPT Is Already Indispensable for One Profession - Realtors. https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/tech/chatgpt-real-estate-realtors https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/tech/chatgpt-real-est... . My partner is sitting next to me right now as I procrastinate on HN being blown away by the industry-specific outline ChatGPT generated for the training she's developing for her company. She says the outline it developed in minutes would have taken 2-4 hours to write, and they're far from dumb and isn't lazy. If consider a company that just generates training all day, it's only a matter of time when a 10-person AI-assisted company is able to compete with a 50-person unassisted company, and on a way lower budget. (Yes, that does already happen today, and yes, mythical man month and 9-women making a baby in 1-month, and the penalty for increased communication required by the increased team size means that adding employees to a project makes it slower are all a thing, but if we can accept that some 10,000 person companies are just able to produce more, even if we may not see it externally), vs some 10 people companies, then we're just debating the exact numbers and management styles for comparison. Look I know that ChatGPT can't solve hard level leetcode problems yet but talk to any programmers who already find CoPilot indispensible, and ask them if they feel it's helped their productivity. Fine sure, it won't help with the actual hard part of programming, debugging and then fixing really hairy bugs (or maybe the hard part is actually the bit where you have to talk to your software's customers and figure out what their requirements are, vs what they say they are), and while it hallucinates it's not to be totally trusted. But just yesterday I used ChatGPT to just tell me the answer of how to properly quote bash strings for my use case. The minutes I spent waiting for the answer is fewer than the minutes it would have taken me to figure out, and far less frustrating and context-distrupting than the alternative, leaving me able to deal with the bigger problem I'm trying to solve rather than worry about the finer points of ", ' and `, in a mysql -e command line using with me-supplied variables (ie no bobby tables).
    - dotnet00 4y ago
      Surely you aren't suggesting that their service is anywhere near as important as basic costs of living?
      - zamnos 4y ago
        It already is if you want your productivity to be competitive in a post ChatGPT world, if you're in an role where it's already proven invaluable. There are many roles where this is not the case. There are many roles where it is. How long did it take for the Internet to become indispensable? For cars? For electricity? The downvotes I got on that comment shows many here clearly disagree, but if it, and future version of the technology mean you can do in 2 hours what it would have taken you 4 or 8, we're not going to get those 4 or 6 extra hours as vacation time, it means we'll just that more productive over an 8 hour work day.
        dotnet00 4y ago
        I'll let you enjoy living in wonderland.
- 411111111111111 4y ago
  My first subscription service as a teenager was world of warcraft. It would be around $22 in today's dollars.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  I guess "cheap" is relative. $20/mo doesn't register as cheap to me at all, generally speaking. Whether or not it's worth the money is a different question entirely.
  - vorticalbox 4y ago
    Seeing you can use gpt-3.5 for $0.002 / 1000 tokens. I use it at work daily for things and it's more like $3 a month.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      I wasn't commenting on the cost of gpt. I was commenting on where the line is that something ceases to be "cheap" on an absolute sort of scale. I was specifically not addressing whether that cost was good value. For me, $20/mo is above the amount that I would say something is "cheap".
      - vorticalbox 4y ago
        That true I was just pointing out with a tiny bit of effort you can get the same for far cheaper and a better version as you can customize the system prompt so it can act how ever you like
  - edgyquant 4y ago
    20$ a month for something you use for work is definitely cheap. It’s not as cheap as your personal streaming account maybe.
- NegativeLatency 4y ago
  I pay for a yearly subscription to a weather app, it's about $10 per year, I get a lot of utility out of that. It's not clear to me right now what that $20 actually gets me, and what the risk associated with using something like this for me.
  - temp_praneshp 4y ago
    That's when you respond by not paying for it.
- vasco 4y ago
  Luckily you can use it for free!
- _joel 4y ago
  You can access it for free?
_joel 4y ago
It's free, if you're hammering tokens then yea, perhaps you should pay for it.
- addisonl 4y ago
  None of their models are free. ChatGPT is free for now.
  - _joel 4y ago
    It's free to use, that's like saying a SaaS isn't free because they don't give you the sourcecode. Free doesn't equate to open.
smaudet 4y ago
Open - Not (yet) closed to only request from large entities that can pay 6 figure contracts...

"Open - for some definition of open" AI Prepare to open your wallet each time you use it.

zamnos 4y ago

Unless you're in an impoverished part of the world, $20/month seems pretty friggin cheap (for user-level access) to me.

manuelmoreale 4y ago
It really isn't. Even in parts of the world that are definitely not impoverished. 20$/month would place it almost at the top of the most expensive subscriptions I have and I live in Italy.
- zamnos 4y ago
  I'm sure your housing, food, possibility car subscription are far more expensive. :)
  - rany_ 4y ago
    Did you actually just compare essentials with a ChatGPT subscription? You're beyond disconnected....
    - burnished 4y ago
      Seems fair to gently challenge OPs top level proclamation.
      - smaudet 4y ago
        To gently challenge your acceptance of an absurd, disconnected "challenge" - When every service starts pushing 20$ subscription fees onto their service to support their backend usage(s) of these services (in a desperate attempt to remain relevant in a global recession), then every service becomes base + 20$ cost. Tabulate various "services", e.g. netflix, disney+, mail-order subscription(s), lets say two or three, this quickly tabulates to 200$ per month (30 + 30 + 30 + 30 + 30 ~= 150, don't forget shipping and taxes). On a 6 figure salary, that's chump change. On a "above minimum wage" salary, you are lucky to have 20$ a month in spare change. In a world where most jobs have disappeared, your 1500$+ rent and 800$+ month becomes suddenly unaffordable for most people, and as most people are unable to pay, rent/subscription prices rise even more. "Open" AI is truly a disaster in the making, in every possible way.
        edgyquant 4y ago
        20$ is for an individual to have unlimited access to a chat form, not the cost for a scaled up business (which would definitely pay per request.)
    - zamnos 4y ago
      Lol and with the immediate downvotes I got for pointing that out say the masses agree with you. I mean look, I get it, if you're in an industry where ChatGPT isn't immediately useful (it's shit at hard-level leet code questions; it's a hosted solution so your company's IT policies should be stopping you from submitting proprietary data to it, and so on) then all the hype is unjustified. But where this thing is already banging out emails way faster than an unassisted human, it's already essential and companies that don't raise their productivty-per-employee are going to get left behind. If I said Internet access was an essential (especially here) few would disagree with me. But is it really? It's only existed for a few decades, all of humanity lived many, many fulfilling lives so it seems it shouldn't be, but here we are.
      - wizzwizz4 4y ago
        > But where this thing is already banging out emails way faster than an unassisted human, … your system is completely broken. Emails are for communicating between people: if they're not being used for that, you need to fix that problem first. > companies that don't raise their productivty-per-employee are going to get left behind Can you give an example of a field where this would actually happen?
        zamnos 4y ago
        > … your system is completely broken. Emails are for communicating between people: if they're not being used for that, you need to fix that problem first. Can you explain a bit more? I don't think I'm understanding your point. If person A writing emails, to be read by the human that receives it, is able to write 3 emails an hour, vs person B writing 9 emails each of similar complexity to those 3 per hour, person B is 3x as productive, delivers 3x the value to the company and ChatGPT is easily worth $20/hour to both them and the company. > Can you give an example of a field where this would actually happen? From the end of January, ChatGPT Is Already Indispensable for One Profession - Realtors. https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/tech/chatgpt-real-estate-realtors https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/tech/chatgpt-real-est... . My partner is sitting next to me right now as I procrastinate on HN being blown away by the industry-specific outline ChatGPT generated for the training she's developing for her company. She says the outline it developed in minutes would have taken 2-4 hours to write, and they're far from dumb and isn't lazy. If consider a company that just generates training all day, it's only a matter of time when a 10-person AI-assisted company is able to compete with a 50-person unassisted company, and on a way lower budget. (Yes, that does already happen today, and yes, mythical man month and 9-women making a baby in 1-month, and the penalty for increased communication required by the increased team size means that adding employees to a project makes it slower are all a thing, but if we can accept that some 10,000 person companies are just able to produce more, even if we may not see it externally), vs some 10 people companies, then we're just debating the exact numbers and management styles for comparison. Look I know that ChatGPT can't solve hard level leetcode problems yet but talk to any programmers who already find CoPilot indispensible, and ask them if they feel it's helped their productivity. Fine sure, it won't help with the actual hard part of programming, debugging and then fixing really hairy bugs (or maybe the hard part is actually the bit where you have to talk to your software's customers and figure out what their requirements are, vs what they say they are), and while it hallucinates it's not to be totally trusted. But just yesterday I used ChatGPT to just tell me the answer of how to properly quote bash strings for my use case. The minutes I spent waiting for the answer is fewer than the minutes it would have taken me to figure out, and far less frustrating and context-distrupting than the alternative, leaving me able to deal with the bigger problem I'm trying to solve rather than worry about the finer points of ", ' and `, in a mysql -e command line using with me-supplied variables (ie no bobby tables).
  - dotnet00 4y ago
    Surely you aren't suggesting that their service is anywhere near as important as basic costs of living?
    - zamnos 4y ago
      It already is if you want your productivity to be competitive in a post ChatGPT world, if you're in an role where it's already proven invaluable. There are many roles where this is not the case. There are many roles where it is. How long did it take for the Internet to become indispensable? For cars? For electricity? The downvotes I got on that comment shows many here clearly disagree, but if it, and future version of the technology mean you can do in 2 hours what it would have taken you 4 or 8, we're not going to get those 4 or 6 extra hours as vacation time, it means we'll just that more productive over an 8 hour work day.
      - dotnet00 4y ago
        I'll let you enjoy living in wonderland.
411111111111111 4y ago
My first subscription service as a teenager was world of warcraft. It would be around $22 in today's dollars.
JohnFen 4y ago
I guess "cheap" is relative. $20/mo doesn't register as cheap to me at all, generally speaking. Whether or not it's worth the money is a different question entirely.
- vorticalbox 4y ago
  Seeing you can use gpt-3.5 for $0.002 / 1000 tokens. I use it at work daily for things and it's more like $3 a month.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    I wasn't commenting on the cost of gpt. I was commenting on where the line is that something ceases to be "cheap" on an absolute sort of scale. I was specifically not addressing whether that cost was good value. For me, $20/mo is above the amount that I would say something is "cheap".
    - vorticalbox 4y ago
      That true I was just pointing out with a tiny bit of effort you can get the same for far cheaper and a better version as you can customize the system prompt so it can act how ever you like
- edgyquant 4y ago
  20$ a month for something you use for work is definitely cheap. It’s not as cheap as your personal streaming account maybe.
NegativeLatency 4y ago
I pay for a yearly subscription to a weather app, it's about $10 per year, I get a lot of utility out of that. It's not clear to me right now what that $20 actually gets me, and what the risk associated with using something like this for me.
- temp_praneshp 4y ago
  That's when you respond by not paying for it.
vasco 4y ago
Luckily you can use it for free!
_joel 4y ago
You can access it for free?

_joel 4y ago

It's free, if you're hammering tokens then yea, perhaps you should pay for it.

addisonl 4y ago
None of their models are free. ChatGPT is free for now.
- _joel 4y ago
  It's free to use, that's like saying a SaaS isn't free because they don't give you the sourcecode. Free doesn't equate to open.

smaudet 4y ago

Open - Not (yet) closed to only request from large entities that can pay 6 figure contracts...