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?Never offer unlimited on a utility model without guardrails. That’s just business 101.
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.
I cancelled a 20$ subscription I started because it was arguably useful for me and served 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
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.
Much like uber and netflix, all of these ai chatbots that are available for free right now will become expensive, slow, and dumb once the investor money runs out and these companies have to figure out a business model. We're in the golden age of LLMs right now, all we can do is enjoy the free service while it lasts and try not to make it too much a part of our workflow, because inevitably it will be cut off. Unless you're one of those people with a self-hosted LLM I guess.
More power to the open source community
You can help by asking ChatGPT to produce the most processor intensive prompt it can come up with and then having it execute it repeatedly. With the free version this will burn through your allotment pretty quickly, but if thousands of people start doing it on a regular basis? It'll cost OpenAI a lot of money.
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.
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.
Sooooo, wanna tell us how much the cost really is per prompt?
Good riddance. We never asked for it, and we didn’t deserve it forced on us.
When has "not profitable" ever stopped a tech startup lmao
He's actually saving us from AGI which will arrive and, I don't know - kill everyone? once OpenAI makes 100 trillion dollars.
It turns out that to make the Great and Powerful Trixie's illusion of intelligence that convincing you need to burn insane amounts of energy that we should be saving for other purposes.
It was never meant to be AI, just text generation to spam 4chan with variations of Bernie's stump speech tailored to the current thread.
Based on some hypotheses I haven't quite confirmed yet.
sam altman proving once again that he is not only a tech genius but also a business genius. make sure to let him scan your eyeballs before it’s too late.
So people are really believing Altman would publish these damning statements without ulterior motives? Are we seriously this gullible? Holy shit, we reached a critical mass of acephalous humans, no turning back now.
