[re-thc]

> the value is there

I'm not saying there's no value. Just like there's expensive tea and cheap tea. The expensive tea doesn't "win" though, which in this context is referring to defeating all the competitors like a >50% marketshare scenario.

And it's not like everyone is sitting still. Every competitor is evolving rapidly. Whether it is ability or pricing.

[lnenad]

I'm saying it's not expensive tea if you have to drink more of the cheap tea to get the ~same effect.

That's why I'm posting this, my expectation (based on previous behavior) is that there should be a response from OpenAI. Considering it's missing I'm worried there's some secret sauce that others are missing.

[re-thc]

> I'm saying it's not expensive tea if you have to drink more of the cheap tea to get the ~same effect.

You don't need 1000s of architects to build a building.

Just like companies don't have everyone as staff engineers.

IF as I explained this was the mid-level engineer (on price) beating every existing staff engineer by miles, then that's winning.

This is not.

> That's why I'm posting this, my expectation (based on previous behavior)

In history, it is still within the time range that OpenAI has reacted and released a new model, so no, nothing new.

[lnenad]

It's not a valid point imho as your paying for tokens, not hours, per token value is much more important and the purpose of getting more lower value tokens does not exist (unless for a fraction of the price to get to the same result). But it's fine if you feel differently.

Yeah, I'm rooting for this otherwise we're in for a rough ride in the next couple of months.