7 ms·
I don't understand the lock-in argument here. Yes, if a competitor comes in there will be switching cost as everything is re-learned. However, from a code persp
by ebiester 3y ago
I don't understand the lock-in argument here. Yes, if a competitor comes in there will be switching cost as everything is re-learned. However, from a code perspective, it is a function of the key and a relatively small API. New regulations outstanding, what is stoping someone from moving from OpenAI to Anthropic (for example) other than the cost of learning how to effectively utilize Anthropic for your use case?
OpenAI doesn't have some sort of egress feed for your database.
- pclmulqdq 3y ago[flagged]
- minimaxir 3y agoI most definitely am not paid by OpenAI and am very confused how my original (critical) comment could be seen as astroturfing.
- airstrike 3y ago> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agolikewise, stop posting these references to the guidelines, if you feel the guidelines are being broken report it to the moderators and move on. This type of post is actually more disruptive than the post you're replying to.
- 0x0000000 3y ago> This type of post is actually more disruptive than the post you're replying to. As is yours. The author of that comment has contact information in their information, why not unicast them?
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance > The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that, in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance. To answer your question more succinctly, because the poster isn't the only person who will read these comments.
- 0x0000000 3y ago> To answer your question more succinctly, because the poster isn't the only person who will read these comments. I would bet the poster you replied to had the same intent.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoI'll always defend your right to say whatever you want but that never implies it's valid.
- ebiester 3y agoI have no financial vested interest. To prove it, I'll post Dr. Emily Bender's fantastic podcast about the problematic issues behind the current LLM wave. https://peertube.dair-institute.org/w/qpKuiNLTuHHMnvWGjnA2D8 https://peertube.dair-institute.org/w/qpKuiNLTuHHMnvWGjnA2D8 (I think they are behind the most cogent critiques and worth knowing.)
- minimaxir 3y ago> OpenAI doesn't have some sort of egress feed for your database. That's what they're trying to incentivize, especically with being able to upload files for their own implementation of RAG. You're not getting the vector representation of those files back, and switching to another provider will require rebuilding and testing that infrastructure.
- goosinmouse 3y agoThats exactly what i thought. Smart strategy on OpenAI's part given that its extremely easy (and free) to do RAG with pgvector.
- nostrebored 3y agoIt's neither free nor performant. The developer experience is lacking vs. other vector database providers and the performance doesn't match those that prioritize performance rather than devex. You're also spending time writing plumbing around postgres that isn't really transferrable work. For some people already in the ecosystem it will make sense.
- lolinder 3y ago> However, from a code perspective, it is a function of the key and a relatively small API. You're thinking of traditional apps and APIs. In an AI application, most of the work is in prompt engineering, not wiring up the API to your app. Prompts that work well for one model will fail horribly for another. People spend months refining their prompts before they're safe to share with users, and switching platforms will require doing most of that refinement over again.
- edgyquant 3y agoSwitching from one API to another generally requires refactoring. I’ve not had much problems moving between LLMs (openai to Anthropic)
- wokwokwok 3y agoThen you’re either not testing your prompts or doing something trivial. Remember: a good model with a good prompt will generate bad outputs sometimes. A bad model with a bad prompt will generate a good output sometimes. That is simply a fact with these non deterministic models. You have to do many iterations for each prompt to verify they are working correctly. > I’ve not had much problems moving between LLMs… If you want to move your prompts to a different model, you’re effectively replacing one: f(prompt + seed) => output With different black box implementation. Unless you’re measuring the output over multiple iterations of (seed) and verifying your prompt still does the right thing, it’s actually very likely that what you’ve done if take an application with a known output space and converted it to an application with an unknown output space… …that partially overlaps the original output space! So it looks like it’s the same. …but it isn’t, and the “isn’t” is in weird edge cases. Unless you’re measuring that, you simply now have an app that does “eh, who knows?” So yes. Porting is trivial if you don’t care if you have the same functionality. …but reliably porting is much harder (or longer).
- esafak 3y agoHow many people are even writing tests for these things?