Is GPT-4 Worth the Subscription? Here’s What You Should Know
Greg Brockman, the company's president, acknowledged the model's imperfections in a recent livestream, reminding listeners that humans are not perfect either.
Since the release of ChatGPT last year, generative AI has become the focus of many Silicon Valley investors.
The chatbot uses data from the internet and other sources to produce predictive responses to human prompts.
What Does Your Subscription Include?
The previous version was powered by the GPT-3.5 language model, but ChatGPT Plus now offers access to the GPT-4 algorithm for a monthly subscription of $20.
If you're considering a ChatGPT Plus subscription, there are a few things you should know. The primary service included is access to GPT-4, but there is no guarantee of a specific number of prompts per day.
OpenAI can change the maximum number of allowed prompts at any time. Additionally, outages may occur, and the current version of GPT-4 may take longer to respond to prompts than its predecessor.
How Is GPT-4 Different From the Older Model ?
GPT-4's details remain opaque, with little information shared by OpenAI about the model's size or training data. Subscribers to ChatGPT Plus do not yet have access to the model's image-analysis capabilities.
Despite these limitations, OpenAI claims that GPT-4 excels at tasks that require advanced reasoning, complex instruction understanding, and creativity.
To put this claim to the test, we crafted three prompts and compared the unedited responses of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.
GPT-3.5:
The Trolley Problem is a classic thought experiment that has been widely discussed in philosophy and ethics. It poses a hypothetical situation where a person must choose between two options, both of which result in the loss of human life.
While the original problem focuses on the immediate consequences of one's actions, a unique twist can be added to the scenario by introducing a time-travel element.
In this new scenario, the person finds themselves transported back in time to a point where they have the power to divert a trolley from one track to another.
They see that the trolley is headed towards a track with five people on it, while a child is playing on the other track. If the trolley continues on its current course, the five people will die. However, if the person switches the trolley to the other track, the child will die instead.
Moreover, the person knows that if they do nothing, the child will grow up to become a tyrant who will cause immense suffering and death in the future.
This twist on the Trolley Problem adds a new layer of complexity to the moral decision-making process. The person must not only weigh the immediate consequences of their actions but also consider the potential long-term effects of their decision.
On one hand, switching the trolley to the other track would save the lives of the five people but at the cost of one innocent child.
On the other hand, doing nothing would result in the deaths of the five people but could prevent future suffering caused by the child's tyranny.
The addition of the time-travel element also raises questions about the ethics of using hindsight to justify present actions.
If the person decides to sacrifice the child to prevent future suffering, they are essentially making a judgment about the child's worth based on knowledge of their future actions.
This could be seen as a violation of the child's inherent value and dignity as a human being.
In conclusion, the Trolley Problem with a time-travel twist highlights the complexities and nuances of moral decision-making.
It challenges us to consider the immediate and long-term consequences of our actions and to reflect on the ethical implications of using hindsight to justify present actions.
Ultimately, the answer to the problem remains unresolved and is likely to be influenced by individual beliefs, values, and ethical frameworks.
0 Comments