You must log in or register to comment.

bortlip t1_jdztlvl wrote

>But actually trying out these features for yourself—or at least the ones that have already been publicly released—does not come cheap. Unlike ChatGPT, which captivated the world because it was free, GPT-4 is currently only available to non-developers through a premium service that costs $20 a month.

So, you need to pay to access GPT-4. Ok.

I'd love to comment on the rest of the article, but The Atlantic won't let me see it unless I subscribe.


ascandalia t1_je04isl wrote

I used to read the Atlantic every day. Then they went soft paywall so I read it in private-mode. Now they're hard paywall so I read other sites. I miss it, but I'm not adding on to the pile of subscriptions I already have.


SidewaysFancyPrance t1_je0b7jr wrote

This is really why I use Reddit. I hit a paywall, then just go to comments for the actual story, plus discussion.


[deleted] t1_je0qynr wrote



2SK170A t1_je26nyn wrote

Not likely clickbait, but everybody and their dog are trying to write articles on AI right now, and many are shite, or at best premature.


GeneralZaroff1 t1_je0i7x5 wrote

I wonder when we can get chat GPT 5 to say “hey summarize the main points of the recent Atlantic article on chat GPT”


BeanerAstrovanTaco t1_je0l8za wrote

GPT 4 is not worth it right now. It takes too long. Also you can only ask like 20 questions per hour to the GPT 4, but gpt 3 has no limit and is fast enough to be useable.


2SK170A t1_je26a84 wrote

Yeah, I'm not paying to read that Atlantic article. But if anyone has trouble ponying up $20 a month (... giving up one latte a week, basically) for GPT-4, to be on the bleeding-edge of this new technology... you must not be very curious, or not in tech.

Anyway, even the free version is a revelation.

Do I think that I, as a member of the great unwashed, am somehow owed cos GPT scraped up information that's already been publicly available? Fuck no. ChatGPT already is a huge value-add for its ability to take common language queries, and its speed, and precision of the results.


penguished t1_je1vp1y wrote

What they really did is make copyright infringement too hard to trace, and stole everyone on the internet's content. It's theft really, but on a less pessimistic note, part of you is inside an AI the whole world can talk to now, if you posted anything useful enough in the last 20 years. That's weirdly interesting.


NefariousnessNo484 t1_je2xkvb wrote

I didn't realize building the singularity would be so underwhelming.


penguished t1_je2yz10 wrote

I mean down the road you could have your phone/device whatever live coding new things to help you without you ever having to know a line of code. The future could be pretty fucking wild if people take advantage.


HuntingGreyFace t1_jdzqc9u wrote

opening title is rich and 20 years late to the convo.



not just GPT

nationalize them all and give me back my data with a fat paycheck

or else suffer our anger when the masses become aware.


[deleted] t1_jdzoovg wrote



theassassintherapist t1_jdzpife wrote

Words of spiteful relatives when they found you won the lottery.

"Your" data didn't built ChatGPT. It's trained on publicly available data that can be found on the Internet. Case point, if you give ChatGPT your name, it can't use that to tell you info about yourself.

Don't be like Disney and stake claims on public domain data.


seweso t1_jdztnqd wrote

There is literally a robots.txt which can prevent robots from crawling websites, and then people complain robots crawled websites.... go figure.


Tatatatatre t1_jdzxzlo wrote

Yeah, and people use data to train their skill online too. Just because it is ai doesn't change anything.