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

GPT-5 is behind schedule

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#41

Post by fzeroracer »

phito wrote: post #5
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #2

Counterpoint: o1-Pro is insanely good -- subjectively, it's as far above GPT4 as GPT4 was above 3. It's almost too good. Use it properly for an extended period of time, and one begins to worry about the future of one's children and the utility of their schooling. o3, by all accounts, is better still. Seems to me that things are progressing quickly enough.

I keep reading this on HN so I believe it has to be true in some ways, but I don't really feel like there is any difference in my limited use (programming questions or explaining some concepts). If anything I feel like it's all been worse compared to the first release of ChatGPT, but I might be wearing rose colored glasses.

If you've ever used any enterprise software for long enough, you know the exact same song and dance.

They release version Grand Banana. Purported to be approximately 30% faster with brand new features like Algorithmic Triple Layering and Enhanced Compulsory Alignment. You open the app. Everything is slower, things are harder to find and it breaks in new, fun ways. Your organization pays a couple hundred more per person for these benefits. Their stock soars, people celebrate the release and your management says they can't wait to see the improvement in workflows now that they've been able to lay off a quarter of your team.

Has there been improvements in LLMs over time? Somewhat, most of it concentrated at the beginning (because they siphoned up a bunch of data in a dubious manner). Now it's just part of their sales cycle, to keep pumping up numbers while no one sees any meaningful improvement.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#42

Post by lm28469 »

mathieuh wrote: post #26
phito wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep reading this on HN so I believe it has to be true in some ways, but I don't really feel like there is any difference in my limited use (programming questions or explaining some concepts). If anything I feel like it's all been worse compared to the first release of ChatGPT, but I might be wearing rose colored glasses.

It’s the same for me. I genuinely don’t understand how I can be having such a completely different experience from the people who rave about ChatGPT. Every time I’ve tried it’s been useless. How can some people think it’s amazing and has completely changed how they work, while for me it makes mistakes that a static analyser would catch? It’s not like I’m doing anything remarkable, for the past couple of months I’ve b…

> How can some people think it’s amazing and has completely changed how they work, while for me it makes mistakes that should a static analyser would catch?

There are a lot of code monkeys working on boilerplate code, these people used to rely on stack overflow and now that chatgpt is here it's a huge improvement for them

If you work on anything remotely complex or which hasn't been solved 10 times on stack overflow chatgpt isn't remotely as useful

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#43

Post by onemoresoop »

h_tbob wrote: post #36

It seems google has a massive advantage here since they can tap all of YouTube to train. I wonder what openai is using for its video data source.

Train for what? For making videos? Train from people’s comments? There’s a lot of garbage on AI slop on youtube, how would this be sifted out? I think there’s more value here on HN in terms of training, but even that, to what avail?

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#44

Post by simondotau »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #21

Everyone's comparing o1 and claude, but neither really work well enough to justify paying for them in my experience for coding. What I really want is a mode where they ask clarifying questions , ideally many of them, before spitting out an answer. This would greatly improve utility of producing something with more value than an auto-complete.

Just today I got Claude to convert a company’s PDF protocol specification into an actual working python implementation of that protocol. It would have been uncreative drudge work for a human, but I would have absolutely paid a week of junior dev time for it. Instead I wrote it alongside AI and it took me barely more than an hour.

The best part is, I’ve never written any (substantial) python code before.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#45

Post by globular-toast »

mathieuh wrote: post #26
phito wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep reading this on HN so I believe it has to be true in some ways, but I don't really feel like there is any difference in my limited use (programming questions or explaining some concepts). If anything I feel like it's all been worse compared to the first release of ChatGPT, but I might be wearing rose colored glasses.

It’s the same for me. I genuinely don’t understand how I can be having such a completely different experience from the people who rave about ChatGPT. Every time I’ve tried it’s been useless. How can some people think it’s amazing and has completely changed how they work, while for me it makes mistakes that a static analyser would catch? It’s not like I’m doing anything remarkable, for the past couple of months I’ve b…

The ones who use it extensively are the same that used to hit up stackoverflow as the first port of call for every trivial problem that came their way. They're not really engineers, they just want to get stuff done.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#46

Post by ziml77 »

from-nibly wrote: post #37
omega3 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who say „it’s bullshit” are the ones that push the technological advance forward.

Not invariably. Some of those people are the ones who want to draw 7 red lines all perpendicular, some with green ink, some with transparent and one that looks like a kitten.

For anyone who hasn't seen what this comment is referencing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#47

Post by ADeerAppeared »

beacon294 wrote: post #19
jsheard wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There's someone with this comment in every thread. Meanwhile, no one answers this because they are getting value. Please take the time to learn, it will give you value.

> Meanwhile, no one answers this because they are getting value.

You're literally doing the same thing you're accusing of. Every HN thread is full of AI boosters claiming AI to be the future with no backing evidence.

Riddle me this. If all these people are "getting value", why are all these companies losing horrendous amounts of money? Why has nobody figured out how to be profitable?

> Please take the time to learn, it will give you value.

Yeah, yeah, just prompt engineer harder. That'll make the stochastic parrot useful. Anyone who has criticism just does so because they're dumb and you're smart. Same as it always was. Everyone opposed to the metaverse just didn't get it bro. You didn't get NFTs bro. You didn't get blockchain bro.

None of these previous bubbles had money in it (beyond scamming idiots), if AI wants to prove it's not another empty tech bubble, pay up. Show me the money. Should be easy, if it's automating so many expensive man-hours of labour. People would be lining up to pay OpenAI.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#48

Post by dartos »

Stevvo wrote: post #31
ericskiff wrote: post #25

What we can reasonably assume from statements made by insiders: They want a 10x improvement from scaling and a 10x improvement from data and algorithmic changes The sources of public data are essentially tapped Algorithmic changes will be an unknown to us until they release, but from published research this remains a steady source of improvement Scaling seems to stall if data is limited So with all of that taken toge…

"With o3 now public knowledge, imagine how long it’s been churning out new thinking at expert level across every field." I highly doubt that. o3 is many orders of magnitude more expensive than paying subject matter experts to create new data. It just doesn't make sense to pay six figures in compute to get o3 to make data a human could make for a few hundred dollars.

That’s an interesting idea. What if OpenAI funded medical research initiatives in exchange for exclusive training rights on the research.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#50

Post by dartos »

ericskiff wrote: post #25

What we can reasonably assume from statements made by insiders: They want a 10x improvement from scaling and a 10x improvement from data and algorithmic changes The sources of public data are essentially tapped Algorithmic changes will be an unknown to us until they release, but from published research this remains a steady source of improvement Scaling seems to stall if data is limited So with all of that taken toge…

I’m curious how, if at all, the plan to get around compounding bias in synthetic data generated by models trained in synthetic data.
Post reply on HN