zlacker

it was really good at some point last fall, solving problems that it had previously completely failed at, albeit after a lot of iterations via autogpt. at least for the tests i was giving it which usually involved heavy stats and complicated algorithms, i was surprised it passed. despite it passing the code was slower than what i had personally solved the problem with, but i was completely impressed because i asked hard problems.

nowadays the autogpt gives up sooner, seems less competent, and doesnt even come close to solving the same problems

>>staina+(OP)
this is exactly what I noticed too

>>staina+(OP)
Hamstringing high value tasks (complete code) to give forthcoming premium offerings greater differentiation could be a strategy. But in counter to this, doing so would open the door for competitors.

>>thelit+Oe
The question I have been wondering is if they are hamstringing high value tasks to creating room for premium offerings or are they trying to minimize cost per task.

>>wolpol+QQ
I think it's the latter. Reading between the lines on costs gives me the impression they have strived to lower computational costs. They already added a cap of 30 queries per 3 hours...