Hacker News Reader

Comment by cdrini | Hacker News Reader

True, but arguably better than "sorry, to use our website, you must have a ChatGPT subscription."

More like "you need to sign up for our website and pay for a subscription", and I'd much rather do that if it's actually providing value. I am absolutely not going to run model locally which slowly churns out words at 5 tps while making the computer hot to touch.

Also much better than every website wanting its own 22 GB rather than the 22 GB being a shared resource.

I would very much like not to have to download 22 GB for some inference capability that is way worse than API calls both in terms of quality and speed.

I would rather pay money than seeing this thing running in my browser that only prints 5 tps on high-end consumer hardware.

Why are you pretending those are the options?

The options are:

1. 22GB per website

2. 22GB per browser

3. 0GB / No AI capabilities

By having this in Chrome they are simply ensuring that option 2 replaces option 1. You still have option 3.

No. The real options are

1. No AI

2. AI that works and is actually useful

3. AI that is slow, crappy and hallucinates all the time

I choose 1 and 2.

Fair, but actually you'd surely want your choice of those three, right?

And what's being discussed here is what the better implementation of option 3 is.

My point is that if you're going with one of the possible implementations of option 3, then 22GB per browser is objectively a lot better than 22GB per website.

that is ~9% of the total available disk space for baseline phones and laptops for a model that is not that useful.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com