OpenAI Says 'Our GPUs Are Melting' As It Limits ChatGPT Image Generation Requests 22
Following OpenAI's viral Studio Ghibli moment, CEO Sam Altman says it has temporarily limited image generation in ChatGPT due to the overwhelming demand on its GPU infrastructure. "It's super fun seeing people love images in ChatGPT, but our GPUs are melting," he posted on X today. The Verge reports: The demand crunch already caused the artificial intelligence company to push back availability of the built-in image generator for users on ChatGPT's free tier. But apparently that measure alone wasn't enough to ease the stress on OpenAI's infrastructure. (Altman said free users will "soon" be able to generate up to three images per day.)
Connectors melt, GPUs burn up (Score:5, Funny)
Even a child knows that.
Re: (Score:3)
Even a child knows he was using a metaphor.
Re:Connectors melt, GPUs burn up (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Connectors melt, GPUs burn up (Score:5, Funny)
Even a child knows he was using a metaphor.
Kid: "What's a metaphor?"
Me: "They run Facebook."
Re: Connectors melt, GPUs burn up (Score:3)
Indeed. And even a child halfway through their vocational training sees the ignorance that the choice of the metaphor is showing.
On par with those ads of someone "soldering" that hold the iron by the heat pipe.
"but our GPUs are melting" (Score:4, Funny)
[AI-generated] pics [of the GPUs melting, Salvador Dali-style] or it didn't happen!
Lack of reverence for freebies (Score:3)
I'm on a paid tier and I re-sell their AI through my software as a service to my user base.
Things haven't been great since the end of January going from almost 100% response rate to API requests to an irritating daily lump of timeouts and failed completions where their API returns garbage, nothing at all or some cloud server error from their end.
Interesting seeing that post today as I've seen no errors for 2 days now so hopefully they've got a handle on it.
Giving away free is cool, I've done it myself, but the take away lessons I learned from that are folks don't appreciate what they get for free and they will gorge themselves on it almost abusively. It'll be mostly bored people just passing time getting GPT to produce worthless crap images for amusement.
Change it to paid and behaviours and attitudes change.
Yes, the user base probably changes to a degree but the perception of value has a big factor in how people treat and use it with reverence in how/what they use it for.
Re:Lack of reverence for freebies (Score:5, Informative)
For the last day, error rates are back down to < 1%.
Why don't they have proper rate-limiting in place anyway? Image generation shouldn't shut down text generation.
Re: (Score:2)
you're "re-selling" someone elses work and you have the audacity to complain?? wtf??
It's a valid business model: buying in bulk and selling single servings at a reasonable price. Most retailers do this.
The flaw is having a business model that is solely dependent on a particular vendor continuing to provide you with what your business relies on. Always have a backup source.
Re: (Score:3)
If you're not even generating enough heat to power a closed-circuit cooling system, are you willfully exaggerating if you say your gpus are melting?
Anyone else reminded of how cell phone companies at the beginning charged for each text because supply was so limited, except now it's unlimited?
Re: Mine too (Score:2)
It's super fun (Score:1)
Cue the ... (Score:2)
I feel like I'm missing out on this (Score:2)
I guess we've hit critical mass when there's enough paid users bogging down the servers. A similar thing happened with Suno, too. I was having a blast making AI generated songs, then they released a newer model (and it was significantly improved [youtube.com]) but they stuck it behind a paywall after you burned through your free credits.
I'd like to say that in hindsight I should've taken a more lucrative career path, but if I had the ability to give my past self advice, it would've just been to hoard a bunch of Bitcoin
Re: (Score:3)
OpenAI announced only a few months ago that their $200 a month tier wasn't profitable, let alone the others.
AI is in that "let's just burn money in the hope of forming an industry" stage, and is now moving towards "Okay, we have a few customers, but everything is still too expensive... how do we get more people to pay so we aren't just burning money" stage.
Which is why OpenAI announced a "PhD-level" (yeah, right) tier for $10,000 a month.
We're just burning through investors money, as far as I can see. It's
openAI should be renamed... (Score:2)