That doesn't resolve them from providing a stable service for something they market. I'm not buying something under the counter, and it's not advertised to be an alternative for people not willing to pay the full price. From my perspective, the subscription is the full price and I expect stable, reliable service.
You say that when the customer makes irrational requests.
Is it irrational to want consent went the subscription terms change? Netflix does it a month in advance, and cancels the plan when no consent given. What do you think is special with LLM companies so they get special treatment?
I'm from Europe so maybe this is why it feels so weird to me. Then again, they could stop offering their services to a region if they don't want to adjust their ways.
What gets me confused is how they aren't prosecuted for this. My theory is that people are too busy with the security threats and (currently) ignore the shady practices.
> If the planner has truly thought the issue through, properly designed the solution, solved all of the emergent problems, then the final "write" of the code is just a few more output tokens.
For me, what usually creates the high cost of implementation with a larger model is the validation process, not the writing of code.
I would get excited to see it finish writing code with so little usage, but then it would gobble up ten times as many tokens on validation.
I've tried to instruct it to keep the validation light with the intention of doing batches of deep validation after a few tasks, but it couldn't stop itself from doing heavy validation on each task no matter how I rephrased the instructions.
reply