Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by OhioMan2943 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

OhioMan2943

[flagged]

View on HN

I did ask for this and looking forward for GPT-5.

I'm sure many other people will be excited too.

Well, I did ask for this. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

> Well, I did ask for this. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

If they ever decide to sell tokens at a profit, even the ones who did ask for it won't be able to use it :-)

(Last I checked, OpenAI has a burn-rate of $5b/m on revenues of $0.5b/m. Maybe it's changed now)

The flatrate pricing models seem unsustainable. But API pricing at the big 3 AI providers is more expensive than per-token pricing for hosted versions of comparable open source models (for models that have an equivalent). And those hosters have no reason to run at a loss. So in terms of pure compute cost of running the LLM, API pricing should be pretty profitable. They just spend a lot of money advancing the state of the art. More than they can make back at the current market size, hence all the posturing about AI becoming ubiquitous and taking over all work

> you don't have to use it.

Except when reaching out to customer support

Except when looking for a job

Except when reading virtually anything new on the web

Except when interacting with like 25% of social media posts

&c.

It's easy to say that except this is technology that affects all of us and set us down a definite path without consultation of the public.

Maybe this will help public realize they don't hate AI, they hate current form of capitalism. It took something which reduces work and made it a bad thing.

> It took something which reduces work and made it a bad thing.

It doesn't reduce work, it improves productivity, and virtually none of the productivity boost of the last 50 years benefited the worker. So you end up working the same hours, producing more and not being paid for the difference

https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/...

Improved productivity is reduced work. We dont have to work the same hours. Labor doesn't always have to relent.

idk man, I'm still working the same hours as 10 years ago, and my retirement age went up since then, if anything I'm working way more, certainly more than my parents and grandparents

Yes precisely what I am trying to say. This is not an outcome of technology, its an outcome of how our socio-economic system is set up. The company owners could have easily given you the benefit of technology improvement, made a 3 day work week or made a 4 hour work day and hired more people or reduced their own ambitions. Instead they chose to squeeze everything out of you.

We agree then. Politicians in my country were saying automation would bring the 3 days work week, in the early 1980s aha

This has been my thinking as well. Quite anti-human that a technology that improves automation and productivity works against common interest rather than for it.

>and you likely didn't either

First of all this is weird statement that I almost exclusively see in english speaking community. I wonder why this pattern ("and neither do you") is so disgustingly popular even in press.

Second: most things ever created by men (not to mention created by nature) were never asked for by anyone.

I never asked for a computer. Or even a pencil. Not until one was introduced into my life.

Do you make the same comment on forums about old people nappies?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com