Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

adweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 296 posts

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#241

Post by int_19h »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #193
int_19h wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My benchmark is giving it novel (i.e. guaranteed to not be in the training set) logical puzzles that require actual reasoning ability, and seeing how it performs. By that benchmark, GPT-4 significantly outperforms both LLaMA 3 and Claude in my personal experience.

That's occurring because you're giving it weak prompts, like I said. GPT4 has been trained to do things like chain of thought by default, where as you have to tell Llama/Claude to do some of that stuff. If you update your prompts to suggest reasoning strategies and tell it to perform some chain of thought before hand the difference between models should disappear.

You are assuming a great deal of things. No, you can absolutely come up with puzzles where no amount of forced CoT will make the others perform on GPT-4 level.

Hell, there are puzzles where you can literally point out where the answer is wrong and ask the model to correct itself, and it will just keep walking in circles making the same mistakes over and over again.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#242

Post by eightysixfour »

ryandrake wrote: post #49

> "its purpose is to help ChatGPT users more easily discover and engage with publishers’ brands and content." What end user actually wants this? I've never in my life woke up and said, "You know what, I'd love to 'engage' with a corporate brand today!" or "I would love help to easily discover Burger King's content, that would be great!" The euphemisms they use for 'spam' are just breathtaking.

I love when people say stuff like this. When people read “interact with brand” they automatically assume it is some dumb, low value garbage like chatting with Burger King.

You “interact with brands” all of the time. You are literally posting this on YC’s public forum, an asset which YC uses to foster a community of the consumers of its investment portfolio’s products. You are interacting with the brand.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#243

Post by jpadkins »

ENGNR wrote: post #222
OtherShrezzing wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since 1987, labour productivity has doubled[1]. A 5x increase would be immediately obvious. If a tool were able to increase productivity on that scale, it would lift every human out of poverty. It'd probably move humanity into a post-scarcity species. 5x is "by Monday afternoon, staff have each done 40 pre-ai-equivalent-hours worth of work". [1] https://usafacts.org/articles/what-is-labor-productivity-and...

But how do you measure labour productivity.

macro scale: GDP / labor hours worked.

company scale: sales / labor hours worked

It's very hard to measure at the team or individual level.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#244

Post by BeetleB »

titzer wrote: post #178
warkdarrior wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI to give every child a superhuman intelligence as a tutor How much would you pay for that? > AI to cut through endless reams of SEO'd bullshit that is the old enshittified internet How much would you pay for that? Is it more or less than what a company would pay OpenAI to boost their brand?

> How much would you pay for that? I would pay $TAXES for that. The United States collectively pays over $800 billion a year for public education ( https://educationdata.org/public-education-spending-statisti... ).

So with that much tax money collected, why are you expecting OpenAI to tutor students? Let the government build the product you would like to see.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#245

Post by osmsucks »

eightysixfour wrote: post #242
ryandrake wrote: post #49

> "its purpose is to help ChatGPT users more easily discover and engage with publishers’ brands and content." What end user actually wants this? I've never in my life woke up and said, "You know what, I'd love to 'engage' with a corporate brand today!" or "I would love help to easily discover Burger King's content, that would be great!" The euphemisms they use for 'spam' are just breathtaking.

I love when people say stuff like this. When people read “interact with brand” they automatically assume it is some dumb, low value garbage like chatting with Burger King. You “interact with brands” all of the time. You are literally posting this on YC’s public forum, an asset which YC uses to foster a community of the consumers of its investment portfolio’s products. You are interacting with the brand.

It's one thing to "interact with a brand" by directly using their products, it's another thing to "interact with a brand" by receiving unsolicited advertisements which get in the way of whatever you were trying to accomplish.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#248

Post by hitpointdrew »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #3
hitpointdrew wrote: post #2

[flagged]

> Presentations are not “decks” Obviously they are, given how common the usage is. But out of curiosity, why do you feel strongly about this?

> Obviously they are, given how common the usage is.

Just because something is, common, accepted, or written in stone, doesn’t mean it’s correct.

> But out of curiosity, why do you feel strongly about this?

Because it’s stupid business jargon that no one had the balls to speak up the first time in history when some micro-managing egotistical C-level exec uttered this debauchery. They should have looked at them like they had two heads and said “What the fuck did you just call the power point?”

But no, people just let it slide and now this BS is common place.

Well I am not letting it slide by anymore.

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#249

Post by beeboobaa3 »

stale2002 wrote: post #228
beeboobaa3 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US government has worked hard to make the lives of copyright infringers miserable for years, even driving them to suicide.

> The US government has worked hard to make the lives of copyright infringers miserable for years They really have not. The fact that I can download any movie in the world right now, and use all of the open source models on my home PC proves that. I am sure there are some random one off cases of infringers being punished, but it mostly doesn't happen. Especially if we are talking about the entire tech industry. The g…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number

Re: Leaked deck reveals how OpenAI is pitching publisher partnerships

#250

Post by btown »

KTibow wrote: post #238
chollida1 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bloomberg's upcoming LLM model will reference back to the source financial statements when calculating financial metrics for you.

That sounds more like general RAG than what the person was asking about. (although RAG might be able to do the same thing)

The embedding distance of a set of output tokens to a document doesn’t mean that it was sourced from there; they could be simply talking about similar things.

I’m looking for the equivalent of the human notion of: “I remember where I was when that stupid boy Jeff first tricked me into thinking that ‘gullible’ was written on the ceiling, and I think of that moment whenever I’m writing about trickery.”

Or, more contextually: “I know that nowadays many people are talking about that, but a few years ago I think I read about it first in the Post.”

Post reply on HN