zlacker

>>davidb+(OP)
Greg just quit too: https://twitter.com/gdb/status/1725667410387378559

>>bluede+rO
This is perfect for Google. When your enemy (OpenAI) is making a massive mistake, don't interrupt them.

>>rvz+kf1
How much is Altman contributing to product, though? Product in its broadest sense - not only improving LLM performance and breadth but applications, or "productization": new APIs, ChatGPT, enterprise capabilities, etc.?

I think Altman is a brilliant guy and surely he'll fall on his feet, but I think it's legitimate to ask to what extent he's responsible for many of us using ChatGPT every single day for the last year.

>>aerhar+oM1
I may be in minority here but I tried using this thing for coding. It's horrible. Bootstrapping (barely) a basic API that even a scaffolding tool from 10 years ago can do is not something I would brag about. If you need anything more complicated that involves 1 or 2 if statements .. good luck.

>>amne+WV1
I wholeheartedly disagree with this, GPT4 has become an indispensable coding sidekick for me. Yes it needs rigorous coaxing and nudging, and sometimes it hallucinates, but I’ve also seen it produce great things that have saved me dozens or hundreds of hours of work this year. Including non-trivial code with far more than two if blocks.

>>aerhar+a02
Same here. I find it lowers the barrier to entry for me starting something, it also sends me down roads I would not have travelled before, which expand my range of solutions to problems.

It does all this in sub 10% of the time I would have spent “googling” things.

I don’t want it to write the whole thing for me anyway :)

>>newsho+lT2
Same for other forms of writing for me: the output from ChatGPT, even after iterations of prompting, is never the final product I make. It gets me 80-90% of the way there to get me over the initial jump, and then I add the polish and flavor.