Hacker News Reader

Comment by wafflemaker | Hacker News Reader

Saying that ChatGPT sucks after trying only the free version is like saying that pizza sucks after trying only the frozen pizza because you don't want to spend $20 on a pizza in a good Italian restaurant.

View on HN

Replying from Italy right now, $20 easily buys you two pizzas, just sayin'.

two _better tasting_ pizzas

I think he's saying he can't justify keeping the subscription.

I'm in the same boat - whenever I think it would be faster to use chatgpt it usually ends up being a waste of time and flow breaker. And it got worse over time. At some point a few months ago I realized I haven't used it once in a month, so why keep paying ?

Copilot is way more useful to me.

What model, pray tell, do you think Copilot runs on, if not a fine-tuned version of GPT?

It's not just about the model, it's about the integration. Copilot is easy to use because it's basically automatic in vscode. So it isn't a 'flow breaker'. That is in some ways its primary benefit: it gives you something similar to searching for the solution a problem without having to leave the editor. (At the loss of being able to see the context of where the solution comes from, of course.)

This is a thread about hallucinations.

>ChatGPT craze has wore off for me, because of constant hallucinations when you ask for something slightly more esoterical. And I can't justify paying 20$ for GPT-4 to have more convincing hallucinations

Integration has nothing to do with hallucinations.

Your response and the person you responded to were discussing copilot vs chatgpt. Both may "hallucinate". Copilot is more useful (to the GP and to me) - it's domain specific and well integrated, despite occasionally producing pure crap.

I also pay for copilot and don't for chatGPT.

Yes, we were discussing Copilot and ChatGPT, two products run on essentially the same model with no clear difference in their ability to hallucinate (or not).

ChatGPT is a product built with models. So is copilot.

GPT and llama are model (families).

Yes and GPT powers copilot?

I'm really straining to understand your point here. Are you implying Llama is the model underneath Copilot?

You should never conflate products with models, it leads to invalid comparisons between models and products. Which for some reason has been the norm. How many times have you heard someone ask "How much worse is Llama than ChatGPT?"?

The point is that while both ChatGPT and Copilot are powered by the same model, they are different products, and one can be useful for one task where the other isn't. Just because someone doesn't find ChatGPT useful doesn't mean they can't find Copilot useful, since there are differences between the two products even if they are powered by the same model.

Copilot is a tool that does intelligent copy paste with an interface that doesn't break flow - smaller models can support that.

ChatGPT tries to be a knowledge oracle/problem solving via conversation and it's not up to that task.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com