3 ms·

So the assistant I could pay to book me incorrect flights would cost $68.00 and hour. This makes me feel a little better about the state of things.

malfist 2y ago
Yeah, but that assistant won't book the wrong flights.
- delusional 2y ago
  I'd say correctness would be worth another 40 bucks an hour.
pants2 2y ago
Presumably every step has to also read the tokens from the previous steps, so it gets more expensive over time. If you run it on a single task for an hour I would not be surprised if it consumed hundreds of dollars of tokens.
- vineyardmike 2y ago
  I’m curious how many tokens this used, and what the actual effective maximum duration it has due to the context window.
MacsHeadroom 2y ago
GenAI costs go down 95% per year. So next year it will be $3.40/hr and more reliable.
- TechDebtDevin 2y ago
  wanna bet?
IanCal 2y ago
Per hour of computer execution is a poor measure. Imagine it did this twice as fast, and cost the same. Is that worse? A per hour figure would suggest so. What if it was far slower, would that be better?
- sigh_again 2y ago
  >Imagine it did this twice as fast, and cost the same. Is that worse? Yes. It could do it ten times as fast. A hundred times as fast. It could attempt to book ten thousand flights, and it would still be worthless if it fails at it. The reason we make machines is to replace humans doing menial work. Humans, while fallible, tend to not majorly fuck up hundreds of times in a row and tell you "I did it boss!" after charging your card for $6000. Humans also don't get to hide behind the excuse of "oh but it'll get better." As long as it has a non zero chance to fuck up and doesn't even take responsibility, it means ithat it's wasting my money running, _and_ wasting my time because I have to double check its bullshit. It's worthless as long as it is not infinitely better. I don't need a bot to play music on Spotify for me, I can do that on my own time if it's the only thing it succeeds at.

malfist 2y ago

Yeah, but that assistant won't book the wrong flights.

delusional 2y ago
I'd say correctness would be worth another 40 bucks an hour.

pants2 2y ago

Presumably every step has to also read the tokens from the previous steps, so it gets more expensive over time. If you run it on a single task for an hour I would not be surprised if it consumed hundreds of dollars of tokens.

vineyardmike 2y ago
I’m curious how many tokens this used, and what the actual effective maximum duration it has due to the context window.

MacsHeadroom 2y ago

GenAI costs go down 95% per year. So next year it will be $3.40/hr and more reliable.

TechDebtDevin 2y ago
wanna bet?

IanCal 2y ago

Per hour of computer execution is a poor measure. Imagine it did this twice as fast, and cost the same. Is that worse? A per hour figure would suggest so. What if it was far slower, would that be better?

sigh_again 2y ago
>Imagine it did this twice as fast, and cost the same. Is that worse? Yes. It could do it ten times as fast. A hundred times as fast. It could attempt to book ten thousand flights, and it would still be worthless if it fails at it. The reason we make machines is to replace humans doing menial work. Humans, while fallible, tend to not majorly fuck up hundreds of times in a row and tell you "I did it boss!" after charging your card for $6000. Humans also don't get to hide behind the excuse of "oh but it'll get better." As long as it has a non zero chance to fuck up and doesn't even take responsibility, it means ithat it's wasting my money running, _and_ wasting my time because I have to double check its bullshit. It's worthless as long as it is not infinitely better. I don't need a bot to play music on Spotify for me, I can do that on my own time if it's the only thing it succeeds at.