Zone Media. Hello you, it's your better offline monologue and I'm your host ed ZiT trum. Now next week I'm going to have a two part of that digs into Microsoft Stata senter pull back an open ai is shaking you funding situation. But this week's monologue focuses an open AI's new model, GPT four point five. You may be wondering what it does differently to GPT four oh, or claudes on at three point seven, or any number of other large language models, And if I'm honest, I have absolutely no idea. Thankfully neither does Sam Ortman, CEO of open Ai, who said, and I quote, the GPT four point five was the first model that feels like talking to a thoughtful person to him, which makes me wonder what the other models have been like. So I went back and look. So compare this to the launch of GPT four oh, which Altman called open AI's best model ever, saying that it was fast, smart, natively multimodal, referring to the ability to accept text as well as audio and video and photos as well, and available to all chat GPT users, including on their free plan, adding that it was a very good model, especially at Coding. By contrast, Alltman summarized GPT four point five as a giant, expensive model, one that required hundreds of thousands of GPUs to launch beyond chat GPT pro. It started there. It's still not as I record this out to plus users or free users. Now. GPT pro of course is open AI is two hundred dollars a month subscription, and it's unclear when plus, which is the twenty buck a month one will get it, but apparently it's in the next few days. Aortman also added that GPT four point five isn't a reasoning model and won't crush benchmarks on account of it being a different kind of intelligence that has and all of these are quotes magic to it that Sam Mortman had not felt before. Yeah, just you know, shit's not doing well when you have to just be like it's magic, It's it's literally magic. I made magic. Now what does the magic do? I'm really not sure. In fact, it's pretty difficult to find exactly what it is that GPT four point five does differently, or what it's good at, or indeed really anything about him. BENJ. Edwards over At asked Tenneker had one developer called it a lemon. GPT four point five costs an incredible seventy five dollars per million input tokens prompts and data pushed into a model, and one hundred and fifty dollars per million output tokens is in the thing it creates. A token is like zero point seven. I think one token is maybe three words. Someone will get up my ass for this. Nevertheless, this seems like a lot. It isn't when you're running a company. And by the way, this is roughly three thousand percent more expensive for input tokens and fifteen hundred percent more expensive for output tokens than GPT four to zero for results that open ai co founder Andredge Carpathy described as a little bit better and awesome, but also not exactly in ways that are trivial to point to. That translates to it's a little bit better, but I can't really tell you why. And yes, you're gonna hear me say something similar in next week's episode, because the larger picture for open ai right now is pretty fucking dire considering their main backer, soft Bank, has to borrow billions of dollars to fund them. Nevertheless, back to four point five Since launch, which was for some reason, on the day that Sam Ortman's child was being born in the hospital, He's been posting some really weird shits since, though. A few days after launch, Aortman claimed that GPT four point five was the first time people had been emailing with such passion, asking the open AI promised never to stop offering a specific model or even replace it with an update, at which point I assume everybody in the room started clapping and they saluted Sam Mortman and said, thank you, sir for making this happen. And by the way, what I'm suggesting is that no one's ever done this, or like one freak did, or maybe Aortman emailed it to himself, who just shut up? Just your company burns five billion dollars a year and the best you've got is this warmed up dog shit about people marine todding you over your model and never taking it away. Has opening I ever even taken away a model? Jesus fucking these companies anyway. A few days later, Altman posted a conversation where he asked GPT four point five if it believed it was real, leading to a series of bullet points with things like what do we mean by real only for GPT four point five, saying that it believed that it was not an independent consciousness, but rather a structured experience happening within your consciousness, referring to Sam Altman, which is the kind of shit that's only impressive if you're an imbecile or so stoned you've texted date of your friends the question what if the joker was Batman? And by the way, the answer to that is called The Batman Who Laughs and it's one of the worst comics ever written. If you want to talk to me about DC Metal, please email me. It's easy. That's e z or z. If you're Canadian or British at Better Offline dot com I a really if you are working for DC Comics right now and you had anything to do with Death Metal or The Batman Who Laughs, you and I have a grievance. You and I need to talk. Sorry what this is a tech pop us right back to open AI. More worryingly, Samultman posted an idea for paid plans where your twenty dollars plus subscription converts the credits you can use across speech just like Deep Research O one. GPT four point five, Sora, and so on, with no fixed limits per feature, and you choose what you want. If you run out of credits, you can buy more. This, to be clear, is an attempt to raise prices without actually raising them by attempting to limit usage of open AI's more expensive models. Chat, GPT plus and other subscriptions give you a limit, for example, a limit of eighty messages every three hours on GPT four to oh, but using one doesn't limit your use of other products. Here, open ai is trying to create a rent seeking model where power users have to pay for more credits if they want to use, say open ai is more expensive models like Sora and O one, and I imagine any situation like this will be one where they hope that people simply won't use their credits or overuse them and have to pay for top ups. This is, of course all theoretical, but it heavily suggests that open ai is getting desperate. And now the information is reporting that open ai executives have told some investors that they will be charging two thousand dollars per month for their low end agent product. And yes that's a quote sold to And again I quote high income knowledge workers with supposed mid tier agents for software development costing possibly ten thousand dollars a month, with supposed PhD level research agents costing twenty thousand dollars a month, and I will tell you the PhDs I know would probably do it for half, and they'd even work for an annoying asshole like Sam Altman. Now you may wonder what any of these things do, and the answer is that neither I nor the Information know. As of right now. The only operational or agent, open ai has his operator, open AI's agent that sometimes successfully uses a web browser search for something in minutes, which would usually take you seconds. The Information attempted to suggest that the two thousand a month agent would be some sort of thing that could sort through and rank sales lead But I'm sorry, do I really have to read this shit with a straight face? Twenty thousand dollars for a PhD level agent? What the fuck does that mean? What would it do? Why do these companies? I get emails every week having to justify my fucking cynicism, But these shittheads, they're allowed to just make up stuff and it leak it to the information The Information publishes. It were all meant to be impressed. What the fucking what the fuck I'm allowed to rent on these? They're allowing me to rant on these. It's just it sickens me. I have had this week at least five people email me and be like, well ed, what would it take to change your mind about this stuff? Why do I have to fucking do it? Why do I The multi billion dollar companies do a dogshit job of actually explaining this stuff or selling it. They lose billions of dollars. But I'm the guy who has to justify myself. Oh well, I'll keep doing it. Nevertheless, NES's old At the bottom of this article's a far more obvious payale horse. Open ai is planning to charge twenty percent to thirty percent of pro customers the two hundred dollars a month subscription that loses the money every time, a higher price because of how many research queries they're doing with Altmann, according to the information, suggesting some sort of hey guessoir a la carte or pay as you go approach. I want to be clear about something. This is not a company that's cooking. This is not a company that's worked out anything. Open Aiye is unprofitable, unsustainable, and deeply, deeply lost. These are the actions of a desperate company run by a desperate man. You have only Sam Morman had a thoughtful friend to talk about all these problems too,

Zone Media. Hello you, it's your better offline monologue and I'm your host ed ZiT trum. Now next week I'm going to have a two part of that digs into Microsoft Stata senter pull back an open ai is shaking you funding situation. But this week's monologue focuses an open AI's new model, GPT four point five. You may be wondering what it does differently to GPT four oh, or claudes on at three point seven, or any number of other large language models, And if I'm honest, I have absolutely no idea. Thankfully neither does Sam Ortman, CEO of open Ai, who said, and I quote, the GPT four point five was the first model that feels like talking to a thoughtful person to him, which makes me wonder what the other models have been like. So I went back and look. So compare this to the launch of GPT four oh, which Altman called open AI's best model ever, saying that it was fast, smart, natively multimodal, referring to the ability to accept text as well as audio and video and photos as well, and available to all chat GPT users, including on their free plan, adding that it was a very good model, especially at Coding. By contrast, Alltman summarized GPT four point five as a giant, expensive model, one that required hundreds of thousands of GPUs to launch beyond chat GPT pro. It started there. It's still not as I record this out to plus users or free users. Now. GPT pro of course is open AI is two hundred dollars a month subscription, and it's unclear when plus, which is the twenty buck a month one will get it, but apparently it's in the next few days. Aortman also added that GPT four point five isn't a reasoning model and won't crush benchmarks on account of it being a different kind of intelligence that has and all of these are quotes magic to it that Sam Mortman had not felt before. Yeah, just you know, shit's not doing well when you have to just be like it's magic, It's it's literally magic. I made magic. Now what does the magic do? I'm really not sure. In fact, it's pretty difficult to find exactly what it is that GPT four point five does differently, or what it's good at, or indeed really anything about him. BENJ. Edwards over At asked Tenneker had one developer called it a lemon. GPT four point five costs an incredible seventy five dollars per million input tokens prompts and data pushed into a model, and one hundred and fifty dollars per million output tokens is in the thing it creates. A token is like zero point seven. I think one token is maybe three words. Someone will get up my ass for this. Nevertheless, this seems like a lot. It isn't when you're running a company. And by the way, this is roughly three thousand percent more expensive for input tokens and fifteen hundred percent more expensive for output tokens than GPT four to zero for results that open ai co founder Andredge Carpathy described as a little bit better and awesome, but also not exactly in ways that are trivial to point to. That translates to it's a little bit better, but I can't really tell you why. And yes, you're gonna hear me say something similar in next week's episode, because the larger picture for open ai right now is pretty fucking dire considering their main backer, soft Bank, has to borrow billions of dollars to fund them. Nevertheless, back to four point five Since launch, which was for some reason, on the day that Sam Ortman's child was being born in the hospital, He's been posting some really weird shits since, though. A few days after launch, Aortman claimed that GPT four point five was the first time people had been emailing with such passion, asking the open AI promised never to stop offering a specific model or even replace it with an update, at which point I assume everybody in the room started clapping and they saluted Sam Mortman and said, thank you, sir for making this happen. And by the way, what I'm suggesting is that no one's ever done this, or like one freak did, or maybe Aortman emailed it to himself, who just shut up? Just your company burns five billion dollars a year and the best you've got is this warmed up dog shit about people marine todding you over your model and never taking it away. Has opening I ever even taken away a model? Jesus fucking these companies anyway. A few days later, Altman posted a conversation where he asked GPT four point five if it believed it was real, leading to a series of bullet points with things like what do we mean by real only for GPT four point five, saying that it believed that it was not an independent consciousness, but rather a structured experience happening within your consciousness, referring to Sam Altman, which is the kind of shit that's only impressive if you're an imbecile or so stoned you've texted date of your friends the question what if the joker was Batman? And by the way, the answer to that is called The Batman Who Laughs and it's one of the worst comics ever written. If you want to talk to me about DC Metal, please email me. It's easy. That's e z or z. If you're Canadian or British at Better Offline dot com I a really if you are working for DC Comics right now and you had anything to do with Death Metal or The Batman Who Laughs, you and I have a grievance. You and I need to talk. Sorry what this is a tech pop us right back to open AI. More worryingly, Samultman posted an idea for paid plans where your twenty dollars plus subscription converts the credits you can use across speech just like Deep Research O one. GPT four point five, Sora, and so on, with no fixed limits per feature, and you choose what you want. If you run out of credits, you can buy more. This, to be clear, is an attempt to raise prices without actually raising them by attempting to limit usage of open AI's more expensive models. Chat, GPT plus and other subscriptions give you a limit, for example, a limit of eighty messages every three hours on GPT four to oh, but using one doesn't limit your use of other products. Here, open ai is trying to create a rent seeking model where power users have to pay for more credits if they want to use, say open ai is more expensive models like Sora and O one, and I imagine any situation like this will be one where they hope that people simply won't use their credits or overuse them and have to pay for top ups. This is, of course all theoretical, but it heavily suggests that open ai is getting desperate. And now the information is reporting that open ai executives have told some investors that they will be charging two thousand dollars per month for their low end agent product. And yes that's a quote sold to And again I quote high income knowledge workers with supposed mid tier agents for software development costing possibly ten thousand dollars a month, with supposed PhD level research agents costing twenty thousand dollars a month, and I will tell you the PhDs I know would probably do it for half, and they'd even work for an annoying asshole like Sam Altman. Now you may wonder what any of these things do, and the answer is that neither I nor the Information know. As of right now. The only operational or agent, open ai has his operator, open AI's agent that sometimes successfully uses a web browser search for something in minutes, which would usually take you seconds. The Information attempted to suggest that the two thousand a month agent would be some sort of thing that could sort through and rank sales lead But I'm sorry, do I really have to read this shit with a straight face? Twenty thousand dollars for a PhD level agent? What the fuck does that mean? What would it do? Why do these companies? I get emails every week having to justify my fucking cynicism, But these shittheads, they're allowed to just make up stuff and it leak it to the information The Information publishes. It were all meant to be impressed. What the fucking what the fuck I'm allowed to rent on these? They're allowing me to rant on these. It's just it sickens me. I have had this week at least five people email me and be like, well ed, what would it take to change your mind about this stuff? Why do I have to fucking do it? Why do I The multi billion dollar companies do a dogshit job of actually explaining this stuff or selling it. They lose billions of dollars. But I'm the guy who has to justify myself. Oh well, I'll keep doing it. Nevertheless, NES's old At the bottom of this article's a far more obvious payale horse. Open ai is planning to charge twenty percent to thirty percent of pro customers the two hundred dollars a month subscription that loses the money every time, a higher price because of how many research queries they're doing with Altmann, according to the information, suggesting some sort of hey guessoir a la carte or pay as you go approach. I want to be clear about something. This is not a company that's cooking. This is not a company that's worked out anything. Open Aiye is unprofitable, unsustainable, and deeply, deeply lost. These are the actions of a desperate company run by a desperate man. You have only Sam Morman had a thoughtful friend to talk about all these problems too,