What are people using the $200 plan for that makes it worth it? You only get their model with their training, you don't have any access to weights or training. And with how nerfed openai makes its models, nothing even remotely nefarious can be done with it. All you can do is process simple data. Which having a purposed trained model seems the most valuable for.
TechTakes
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
Can someone explain the Pale Horse reference?
In the Bible's book of revelations, John (the author) is witnessing the end of the world and sees four horsemen being unleashed upon the world to spread a curse/trial/whatever wherever they ride. Each horseman brings with them something different- famine, disease, war (or strife), and death. Death is the last, IIRC, and rides upon a pale horse. I think that's what they're referencing. This person is saying that openAI is going to die soon.
Why is same personally picking subscription prices anyway? Should there be some accountant doing that math? Wtf
Why is AI not making enough money? I specifically requested it.
If it worked for Elon and his 8 per blue check, it has to work for our altman boi
If they are losing money on $200/month, that does not necessarily mean they lose money on the $20/month.
One is unlimited, the other is not. You only have to use the $200 subscription more than 10 times the amount the $20 subscription allows for OpenAI to earn less on that subscription.
We already know they're losing money on everything
Yeah, with see this all the time with emerging tech and platforms. All of the top tech companies now were once spending cash faster than they could make it, and all the naysayers saying they’d never be profitable.
Don’t y’all get tired of being wrong sometimes? Maybe try to learn from the past.
And how many failed technologies and companies were there along the way? How many movies do you watch on your LaserDisc player? Or your HDDVD player?
This current "AI" iteration is already hitting its limits despite having access to the sum total of human history. The bubble is already bursting as companies are finding that people don't want AI in their refrigerators any more than they want it to replace a basic search engine or making fake Facebook accounts for you to talk to like Tom from MySpace.
OpenAI has said that they will go bankrupt if they can't train their AI on copyrighted material for free.
It's largely a tech without a use case in this current form, and not every money pit turns into a success before the companies burning cash go bankrupt.
THANK YOU. I feel the exact same way, word for word, although my feelings are directed at juicero rather than openai. sick of the juicero naysayers who don't understand
you may in fact want to understand how much the ZIRP years had a hand in this, and then to also look just how many of those that remain (of which there continue to be fewer and fewer) are having to engage in Creative Accounting to make it seem like everything is fine
maybe try to learn from the past.
This reminds me of this fossil cable company owner. He just couldn't understand why they needed more bandwidth. Netflix and youtube had come in to being and this old fart just didn't get that people were actually using their bandwidth.
Wonder what their financials are actually, usually with cloud capital ventures like these they usually still magically keep raking it in even though they're "losing money".
For instance, Amazon during the pandemic paid zero corporate tax even though they had record sales because they "didn't make any profit", Tesla too who didn't make profit during 2020 yet their share price went 10x and they had plenty of shares to sell if they wanted.
The trick is to spend all the money you earn.
Spend all the money you earn on fees to a shell company that you own in a country with less or no corporate tax rate.*
I cancelled a 20$ subscription I started because it was arguably useful for me and setved exactly one use-case. Now I don't need it anymore.
Of course, they had a form asking feedback/why. I chose "ChatGapT is nott advanced enough" as that was one of the alternatives. Hopefully it will lead to them putting more resources into development and burn through investor money faster.
"Trust me bro, just 200m dollars more"
- Sam Altman, probably
Just one more datacenter bro, just one more (that consumes the same power as Belgium.)
This is something I've been speculating for a while. The cost of running these complex systems (as OpenAI models aren't just LLMs) is subsidized so heavily that we don't really know the cost of running these things.
This is a huge risk to any business, as the price for these services has to go up significantly in the long term.
Was it altman that tweeted they were near the singularity? I assumed it was a way to raise money. Felt more like "Fuck! We need more money to burn."
they were only “near AGI” before their most recent funding rounds closed, after that they were “a few thousand days” away
More power to the open source community
By "Sam Altman said" in a "series of posts", this article means these two tweets from 10 hours ago: https://twitter.com/sama/status/1876104580070813976.
This is a screenshot of a tweet talking about an article written about two tweets by Sam Altman. Is this really the world we're living in, now?
I've seen more written on one post. People will eat up 'news' if presented in the right way. There is a reason the stupid websites and advertisers use the click-bait titles.
Yeah, and I think you're pretending it's more ridiculous than it is
Uber didn't make a profit for a very long time. This is part of the game in silicon valley. Fake it until you make it.
Okay everyone should create an openai account and start feeding it shit. Ask it the most braindead questions ever, if they your questions as training data itll just fuck the next model up even more.
What what in the butt?
Never offer unlimited on a utility model without guardrails. That’s just business 101.
"I personally chose the price"
Is that how well-run companies operate? The CEO unilaterally decides the price rather than delegating that out to the numbers people they employ?
far, far, far, far, far, far, far fewer business people than you’d expect/guess are data-driven decision makers
and then there’s the whole bayfucker ceo dynamic which adds a whole bunch of extra dumb shit
it’d be funnier if it weren’t for the tunguska-like effect it’s having on human society both at present and in the coming decades to follow :|
I’m guessing that means a team or someone presented their pricing analysis to him, and suggested a price range. And this is his way of taking responsibility for making the final judgment call.
(He’d get blamed either way, anyways)
While the words themselves near an apology, I didn't read it as taking responsibility. I read it as:
Anyone could have made this same mistake. In fact, dumber people than I would surely have done worse.
A real ceo does everything. Delegation is for losers who can’t cope. Can’t move fast enough and break enough things if you’re constantly waiting for your lackeys to catch up.
If those numbers people were cleverer than the ceo, they’d be the ones in charge, and they aren’t. Checkmate. Do you even read Ayn Rand, bro?
Is that what Ayn Rand is about? All I really remember is that having a name you chose yourself is self-fulfilling.
Oh boy I got a fun video for you: https://youtu.be/GmJI6qIqURA @26:50
Atlas Shrugged is so bad that if you didn't know anything about the author, it could be read as a decent satire.
A monologue that last SIXTY PAGES of dry exposition. Barely credible characterization from the protagonist and villains and extremely poor world building.
Anthem is her better book because it keeps to a simple short story format - but still has a very dull plot that shoehorns ideology throughout. There’s far better philosophical fiction writers out there like Camus, Vonnegut, or Koestler. Skip Rand altogether imo
I think I remember Jeff Bezos in "The Everything Store" book seeing a price they charged for AWS and went even lower for growth. So there could be some rationale for that? However, I think switching AI providers is easier than Cloud Providers? Not sure though.
I can imagine the highest users of this being scam artists and stuff though.
I want this AI hype train to die.
Should have asked chatgpt to play the role of a CEO.
CEO personally chose a price too low for company to be profitable.
What a clown.
More like he misjudged subscriber numbers than price.
please explain to us how you think having less, or more, subscribers would make this profitable
Yeah, the tweet clearly says that the subscribers they have are using it more than they expected, which is costing them more than $200 per month per subscriber just to run it.
I could see an argument for an economy of scales kind of situation where adding more users would offset the cost per user, but it seems like here that would just increase their overhead, making the problem worse.
despite that one episode of Leverage where they did some laundering by way of gym memberships, not every shady bullshit business that burns way more than they make can just swizzle the numbers!
(also if you spend maybe half a second thinking about it you’d realize that economies of scale only apply when you can actually have economies of scale. which they can’t. which is why they’re constantly setting more money on fire the harder they try to make their bad product seem good)
They're still in the first stage of enshittification: gaining market share. In fact, this is probably all just a marketing scheme. "Hi! I'm Crazy Sam Altman and my prices are SO LOW that I'm LOSING MONEY!! Tell your friends and subscribe now!"