4 ms·
> How could they justify that asking price? They're still selling $1 for <$1. Like personal food delivery before it, consumers will eventually need to wake up
by mvdtnz 2y ago
> How could they justify that asking price?
They're still selling $1 for <$1. Like personal food delivery before it, consumers will eventually need to wake up to this fact - these things will get expensive, fast.
- spiderfarmer 2y agoLet a thousand providers bloom.
- Ekaros 2y agoI generally question how wide spread willingness to pay for the most expensive product is. And will most users of those who actually want AI go with ad ridden lesser models...
- vel0city 2y agoI can just imagine Kraft having a subsidized AI model for recipe suggestions that adds Velveeta to everything.
- phillipcarter 2y agoI read this more as "we are releasing a model checkpoint that we didn't optimize yet because Anthropic cranked up the pressure"
- josh-sematic 2y agoOne difference with food delivery/ride share: those can only have costs reduced so far. You can only pick up groceries and drive from A to B so quickly. And you can only push the wages down so far before you lose your gig workers. Whereas with these models we’ve consistently seen that a model inference that cost $1 several months ago can now be done with much less than $1 today. We don’t have any principled understanding of “we will never be able to make these models more efficient than X”, for any value of X that is in sight. Could the anticipated efficiencies fail to materialize? It’s possible but I personally wouldn’t put money on it.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y agoI’ll probably stick to open models at that point.
- sebzim4500 2y agoThis is often claimed on HN but there is no evidence that it is actually true. sama has tweeted that they lose money on pro, but in general according to leaks chatgpt subscriptions are quite profitable. The reason the company isn't profitable in general is they spend billions on R&D.