this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1550 readers
17 users here now

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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (8 children)

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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can someone explain the Pale Horse reference?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (18 children)

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.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Why is same personally picking subscription prices anyway? Should there be some accountant doing that math? Wtf

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Why is AI not making enough money? I specifically requested it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If it worked for Elon and his 8 per blue check, it has to work for our altman boi

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

We already know they're losing money on everything

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (12 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ngl, you had me on the first half.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The trick is to spend all the money you earn.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.*

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

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
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Just one more datacenter bro, just one more (that consumes the same power as Belgium.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (3 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

they were only “near AGI” before their most recent funding rounds closed, after that they were “a few thousand days” away

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

More power to the open source community

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (4 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, and I think you're pretending it's more ridiculous than it is

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

What what in the butt?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Never offer unlimited on a utility model without guardrails. That’s just business 101.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (7 children)

"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?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (3 children)

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 :|

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Is that what Ayn Rand is about? All I really remember is that having a name you chose yourself is self-fulfilling.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Should have asked chatgpt to play the role of a CEO.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This answer would be much funnier if that wasn't his fucking plan.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (12 children)

CEO personally chose a price too low for company to be profitable.

What a clown.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (4 children)

More like he misjudged subscriber numbers than price.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (9 children)

please explain to us how you think having less, or more, subscribers would make this profitable

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

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)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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!"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›