[HN Gopher] OpenAI delays launch of custom GPT store until early...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenAI delays launch of custom GPT store until early 2024
        
       Author : cloudking
       Score  : 56 points
       Date   : 2023-12-01 19:47 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.axios.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.axios.com)
        
       | etewiah wrote:
       | This is awesome for the movement to rename GPT to gipety and GPTS
       | to gipeties ;)
        
       | intellectronica wrote:
       | A "scoop"?! Each and every creator of a GPT has received an email
       | with this announcement from OpenAI.
        
         | devindotcom wrote:
         | can you forward yours? I didn't get one for whatever reason.
         | devin at techcrunch dot com
        
           | egman_ekki wrote:
           | > Dear GPT Builder,
           | 
           | > It's been less than a month since we announced GPTs and we
           | are blown away by the useful and fun GPTs that you and the
           | builder community have created.
           | 
           | > We are continuing to make improvements to GPTs based on
           | your feedback. To improve Actions we updated the
           | configuration interface, enabled one click testing, added
           | debug messages in preview, and now allow multiple domains.
           | There have also been questions around uploaded files.
           | Uploaded files are downloadable when using Code Interpreter
           | so we've made this feature default off and added messaging to
           | better explain this. If you have additional feedback, we'd
           | love to hear from you here.
           | 
           | > In terms of what's next, we are now planning to launch the
           | GPT Store early next year. While we had expected to release
           | it this month, a few unexpected things have been keeping us
           | busy! In the meantime, we will have some other great updates
           | to ChatGPT soon. Thank you for investing time to build a GPT.
           | 
           | > - ChatGPT Team
        
             | devindotcom wrote:
             | appreciated, but do you mind forwarding the email itself?
             | it's not that I don't trust you, just helpful to have. I
             | won't use your email for anything.
             | 
             | edit: thanks to all who sent.
        
               | nwiswell wrote:
               | I don't mean to be harsh, but is this journalism now?
               | 
               | When you write an article and say something has been
               | corroborated by your "sources", does that mean "forwarded
               | to you by anonymous HN posters"?
               | 
               | You don't have an IRL relationship with a source who has
               | created a GPT? You can't throw a stone in the valley
               | without hitting somebody who has.
        
       | vineet wrote:
       | I am hoping that the extra time will mean that they get Custom
       | GPTs to work even better.
        
       | NameError wrote:
       | The release of plugins was underwhelming for a lot of users, I
       | wonder if they're worried about the same thing happening again. I
       | had fun making a plugin when they were first announced but the
       | developer experience was clunky and frustrating, and there was a
       | lot of confusion around how the plugin store actually worked.
       | 
       | I haven't made the time to convert my plugin into a GPT but I'm
       | planning to, hopefully it'll be a bit of a smoother experience
       | this go around.
        
         | brandall10 wrote:
         | I suspect they're a bit like Google... wonderful tech but
         | terrible product company.
         | 
         | Everything outside of the quality of their models is suspect:
         | 
         | - GPTs are super quirky w/ weird limitations... try processing
         | an image file larger than an emoji from base 64 text and watch
         | it render the base64 string in a code window and give up after
         | about 1k tokens. The vast majority of the time it doesn't even
         | try and hallucinates processing what it thinks a file related
         | to the context of the GPT would do.
         | 
         | - The assistants API is a black box of inefficiency and out of
         | control costs due to a propensity to barf huge amounts of
         | context from problematic RAG, etc. Yet it's not obvious in real
         | time because there is no token consumption information like the
         | normal chat API. It's almost like they rolled it out like this
         | to destroy developer trust on the spot by doing a 'gotcha' to
         | anyone naive to roll this out to prod without sufficient
         | testing.
         | 
         | I'm honestly unsure how GPTs will in fact be monetized. Are
         | purchasers required to have a Plus account w/ sellers getting a
         | one time sale? Will sellers have to pay extra usage fees, or a
         | shared subscription type thing split between them and OpenAI?
         | 
         | I think they should just give up on this area of the business.
         | Dev day produced some anxiety by encroaching on the business
         | models of a large segment of newly funded AI startups... then
         | showing the efforts to be half-baked while encouraging more
         | lock-in just is going to erode trust and uptake on API usage in
         | general, possibly having people be relieved when Google Gemini
         | and similar efforts are unveiled in the coming months.
        
           | packetlost wrote:
           | It really seems like it's there to take any low hanging fruit
           | away from the startup market and continue riding the hype
           | train as long as possible while paradoxically also bringing
           | to light just how useless GPTs are for most serious
           | automation tasks.
        
         | azemetre wrote:
         | Might be underwhelming because the rollout of allowing authors
         | was extremely limited? That's how I felt.
         | 
         | I pay for ChatGPT and never got off the waitlist when first
         | announced. Killed all hype for me.
        
           | karmasimida wrote:
           | The UX itself isn't good anyway.
           | 
           | I tried to use this is to create a travel itinerary, TBH, it
           | is the wrong interface for this task, it is slow and it is
           | full of useless information. Ain't good.
           | 
           | The most useful one is probably the PDF reader plugin but now
           | that is part of ChatGPT itself.
        
           | huijzer wrote:
           | Yes and having to manually toggle the plugins and hope that
           | your requests end up in the right one wasn't great either.
           | Especially with the 1 action per response limit. The new GPTs
           | look and feel much more, for lack of a better word, natural.
           | I've had an interaction in the main GPT where it first looked
           | up something on the internet and then followed up with
           | generating an image and writing a suitable text. I found it
           | pretty magical.
        
       | MattDaEskimo wrote:
       | Not a surprise considering the recent events. Hope to see more
       | information released in the meantime.
        
       | TheCaptain4815 wrote:
       | You can use Google as a replacement to find GPTs. For example:
       | 
       | "site:chat.openai.com/g/ <healthcare>"
        
       | kristianpaul wrote:
       | Too soon
        
       | tempaccount420 wrote:
       | As is, actions in custom GPTs are almost useless right now, since
       | you need to approve each and every request. Hopefully they fix
       | that.
        
         | ianbicking wrote:
         | There's a form in the GPT where you can mark each action as
         | "Ask" or... actually only "Ask", not deny or allow. On a single
         | request I got a button that said "Always Allow" which I
         | clicked... but only once and it did not do as advertised.
         | 
         | Anyway, clearly it's coming.
        
       | Kiro wrote:
       | Is anyone actively using custom GPTs? I've really tried to find a
       | compelling use case but every thing I can think of is much better
       | off as a simple system prompt you just copy and prepend (since
       | it's easier to modify it, and it becomes more transparent).
        
         | erlendellingsen wrote:
         | I use it to avoid exactly that. Having to store, copy and paste
         | various prompts over and over. I create one for each "domain" I
         | operate with.
        
         | woah wrote:
         | You can upload files. I've made one to act as a coding
         | assistant to a little-known language that way. It seems to work
         | OK. It makes syntax errors, but I'm not sure if that's a
         | limitation of the Custom GPTs paradigm, or if the docs I gave
         | it aren't any good. I know there are other services that do
         | this kind of thing, but why bother finding one?
        
         | natbennett wrote:
         | I have so far found them "useful" mostly for having a
         | collection of system prompts, and for sharing silly prompts
         | with friends. It's basically a way to attach a prompt to a URL.
         | 
         | For instance I have a "Beastie Bot" that plays a game where it
         | categorizes things as "Beasts" or "Beasties."
        
       | stainablesteel wrote:
       | the customized GPTs are honestly a let down
       | 
       | you can't do anything fun with them, and that's not because it
       | isn't possible but because openai is afraid to step outside of
       | the safety zone. the response style really doesn't change much,
       | default behavior leaks into everything so easily
       | 
       | what were they expecting?
        
         | Tostino wrote:
         | Honestly, I am excited for people to re-implement the API for
         | this using open models because of this. Maybe let the API
         | stabilize a little, and i'm sure some implementations will pop-
         | up.
        
       | morph123 wrote:
       | Still dont understand why anyone would "pay" for this. The
       | default model will probably be better in pretty much all cases. I
       | guess if someone randomly has some sort of esoteric knowledge?
       | Seems very limited.
        
         | cactusplant7374 wrote:
         | Is a custom GPT just a boatload of prompts injected by default?
        
         | andybak wrote:
         | Not sure how much you've used custom GPTs. They are currently
         | flawed and buggy but I think they hold promise. They combine 3
         | things:
         | 
         | 1. A custom initial prompt (yeah - you can paste this in every
         | time and keep a personal database of special purpose prompts -
         | but it rather kills the convenience and utility)
         | 
         | 2. A JSON description of one or more APIs that can be used (not
         | just for retrieveal of information - but potentially to take
         | actions. This aspect is under-explored IMHO)
         | 
         | 3. Uploaded documents which (I presume) are encoded into a
         | vector database. This part is currently the most flaky. I was
         | hoping this was a way to get round context-window limits. It
         | has worked very badly so far and I'm not sure I understand why.
         | 
         |  _If_ these things start working effectively in combination
         | then there 's potentially a "the whole is greater than the sum
         | of it's parts" going on here. Each of these things is fairly
         | useful on it's own but if you combine them and have them on tap
         | - and someone else has put the hours in to making them useful
         | and well-tuned - then it is potentially transformative.
         | 
         | Yes - GPT on it's own is pretty good at a lot of things, but
         | you spend a long time working around it's flaws and blind-
         | spots.
         | 
         | Custom GPTs don't cure all the warts but they are still
         | potentially a force-multiplier.
         | 
         | EDIT - I'm also currently underwhelmed how well the other
         | "special powers" work together. Image generation can't be fed
         | into Image Understandin. Python is hamstrung in various ways.
         | And GPT has no real understanding of how to prompt Dall-E. In
         | fact it's worse at prompting than I am.
         | 
         | These flaws are potentially fixable. I hope.
        
           | morph123 wrote:
           | I guess. I assume the OpenAI vision, in the short term, is
           | for there to be a beefy LLM on top that can call the correct
           | sub LLMs that have more bespoke knowledge about random
           | things, and sort of orchestrate an answer based on that.
           | 
           | Not sure why OpenAI feels the need to pay people for this
           | though, I guess to incentivize use?
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | Can't wait for this new feudal lord to be replaced by open
       | source.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-12-01 23:01 UTC)