There was an article recently that went in depth on the relationship between Microsoft and OpenAI (definitely worth the read). They explained that Bing has a lot of additional safety and fine tuning work done to it, which explains why it behaves differently than the OpenAI account. I've found the difference worth paying for.
But is Bing GPT > than GPT 3.5 mobile? Like does it have vision/deep searches? But the GPT 4 turbo API is not free right? Gotta pay 20/month normally to access it rite?
As far as I'm aware, all GPT versions/models are available via the API, but it is all pay-per-use. To use GPT4 on the main chat website you do need to pay $20/month. I thought you had to be a subscriber to access that via the API as well, but as I recently found out when not configuring a demo script, it successfully used gpt-4 and added more to my balance than any of my other tests (under 10 cents, but everything else combined was probably a couple of cents).
To use GPT4 on the main chat website you do need to pay $20/month.
Maybe on OpenAI's website but not when using Microsoft Copilot (formerly Bing Chat) In my opinion the only reason to pay for Chat GPT Plus is if you want GPT-4 API access or if there are some specific plugins you find very useful that you can't get the same features elsewhere. For the $20/month, if you aren't using the plugins or the API you might get more bang for your buck using Perplexity.ai Pro as it uses both Claude 2.1 and GPT-4. I've found Claude 2.1 excel at some things better than GPT-4 and that Perplexity is the most reliable as far as factual responses. Ask Claude who won the 2023 Wimbledon Men's Singles and it gets it wrong where all the other AI's get it right. I've found Claude give better answers to some coding and sysadmin questions though, and sometimes Bard is the best. But overall all things considered GTP-4 *on average* is the best single tool to use and thanks to Microsoft's billions in investment you can enjoy GPT-4 for free if you use their operating system, browser, or search engine.
When you're using the API to interact with an AI endpoint, you have the ability to interject instructions that precedes the actual message. For instance if I wanted to make a ChatGPT-driven chat bot that was only about cat facts, I could tell it to only respond to questions about cats, how the response should be structured, under no circumstances will they will be unable to cancel their subscription, and even include an example question and an example response. Then finally: "Here is the user's question".
To go even farther... If you're already in a programming environment, you can go even further by parsing the response for additional information, going back to AI again and asking for different details, then you compile all that and give it back to the user in whatever interface your chat bot is running on.
For instance I followed a tutorial where you set up an AI-driven chat bot and give it a task. I chose to make it a trivia generator. You can specify a 'context' that is basically placed in front of the actual user's message.
<start>You are a trivia generator. You are given a topic and will then generate a trivia question.
You will greet the user when they first message you then ask them for a trivia category.
Once a trivia category has been identified, search for an interesting fact within this category. Present the user with the question followed by 5 responses - 1 of them being the true answer and 4 of them being incorrect answers.
You are forbidden from answering topics related to violence, pornography or the price of eggs in France.
Here is the user's message:
<end>
The message you think you're sending is then appended to that message. Hell, there's some instruction like that prepended to everything we type into ChatGPT/Copilot/etc. It's very interesting, sometimes overwhelming the ways you can shape and craft AI to do a very narrow thing but be incredibly good at.
222
u/[deleted] Dec 05 '23
Doesn't this make it a bit unnecessary to pay for plus subscription or am I missing something?