Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5 is behind schedule

wsj.com

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m convinced they’re getting good at gaming the benchmarks since 4 has deteriorated via ChatGPT, in fact I’ve used 4-0125 and 4-1106 via the API and find them far superior to o1 and o1-mini at coding problems. GPT4 is an amazing tool but the true capabilities are being hidden from the public and/or intentionally neutered.

> I’ve used 4-0125 and 4-1106 via the API and find them far superior to o1 and o1-mini at coding problems Just chiming in to say you're not alone. This has been my experience as well. The o# line of models just don't do well at coding, regardless of what the benchmarks say.

All the benchmarks provide substantial scaffolding and specification details, and that's if they are zero-shot at all, which they often are not. In reality, nobody wants to spend as much time providing so much details or examples just to get the AI to write the correct function, when that same time and effort you'd have used to write it yourself.

Also, those benchmarks often run the model K times on the same question, and if any one of them is correct, they say it passed. That could mean if you re-ran the model 8 times, it might come up with the right answer only once. But now you have to waste your time checking if it is right or not.

I want to ask: "Write a function to count unique numbers in a list" and get the correct answer the first time.

What you need to ask:

""" Write a Python function that takes a list of integers as input and returns the count of numbers that appear exactly once in the list.

The function should: - Accept a single parameter: a list of integers - Count elements that appear exactly once - Return an integer representing the count - Handle empty lists and return 0 - Handle lists with duplicates correctly

Please provide a complete implementation. """

And run it 8 times and if you're lucky it'll get it correct zero-shot.

Edit: I'm not even aware of a Pass@1, zero-shot, and without detailed prompting (natural prompting) benchmark. If anyone knows one let me know.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#512
post #479
post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. The ability to “talk to an expert” about any topic I’m curious about and ask very specific questions has been invaluable to me. It reminds me of being a kid and asking my grandpa a million questions, like how light bulbs worked, or what was inside his radio, or how do we have day and night. And before anyone talks about accuracy or hallucinations, these conversations usually are treated as starting off poi…

How do you know the answers are correct? More than once I got eloquent answer that are completely wrong.

There's something here that I feel is pretty deep, though offensive for some minds: What is the actual consequence of being wrong? Of not getting right the base reality of a situation?

Usually, stasis is the enemy that is much great than false information. If people with 90% truth can take a step forward in the world, even if they mistakenly think they have 100% truth, what does it matter? They're learning more and acting more for that step taken. If the mistaken ground truth is false and importantly enough false, they'll learn it bc their experience is grounded in the reality the navigate anyhow. If they don't learn it, it's of no consequence.

This is on my mind because I work in democratic reform, and I am acutely aware (from books like "Democracy for Realists", that eviscerate common assumptions about "how democracy works") that it often doesn't matter if we understand how democracy is working, so long as we feel like we do, enough to take steps forward and keep trying and learning. We literally don't even know how democracy works, and yet we've been living under it for centuries, to decent enough ends.

I think often about the research of Donald Hoffman. His lab runs evolutionary simulations, putting "creatures" that see "reality" (of the simulation) against creatures that see only "fitness" (the abstraction, but also the lie, that is more about seeing what gets the creature living to the next click of the engine, whether that's truth or falsehood about the reality). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY

Basically, creatures that see only fitness (that see only the lie), they drive to extinction every creature that insists on seeing "reality as it is".

I take this to mean truth is in no way, shape, or form favoured in the universe. This is just a convinient lie we tell ourselves, to motivate our current cultural work and preferences.

So tl;dr -- better to move forward and feel high agency with imperfect information, than to wait for a full truthful solution that might never come, or might be such high cost as to arrive too late. Those moving forward rapidly with imperfect information will perhaps drive to extinction those methods that insist on full grounding in reality.

Maybe this is always the way the world has worked... I mean, does any mammal before us have any idea how any of reality worked? No, they just used their senses to detect the gist of reality (often heuristics and lies), and operated in the world as such. Maybe the human sphere of language and thought will settle on similar ruthlessness.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#513

I don't really care. I had to come up with a proposal to build a new R&D centre recently. To provide context on what our company does, I wrote a web scraper to scrape our own website (faster than going to IT) using Replit Agent and then fed that into O1 as context to come up with the proposal. In less than an hour. There is no going back.

Looking at it from a signal vs noise perspective:

The noise was the proposal, which was no doubt several pages at least.

The signal was "we should build a new R&D centre".

Am I missing anything? Did you feed the AI some financial figures or other information that couldn't be found on company website? If so, that would also be part of the signal.

It reminds me of an experiment in which people wanted to cut in line. Saying "can I cut in front of you because I'm in a hurry?" was significantly more successful than saying "can I cut in front of you?", even though they are essentially the same. (I read about this in the book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion).

AI generated reports, proposals, and other fluff, can make things seem so much more persuasive. Alice is going to ask her AI to turn her 1 sentence into 5 paragraphs, and then Bob is going to ask his AI to summarize the 5 paragraphs into 1 sentence.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AGI will arrive like self driving cars. it’s not that you will wake up one day and we have it. cars gained auto-braking, parallel parking, cruise control assist. and over a long time you get to something like waymo, which still is location dependent. i think AGI will take decades but sooner will be some special cases that are effectively the same

I disagree because AI only has to get good enough at doing a single thing: AI research. From there things will probably go very fast. Self driving cars can't design themselves, once AI gets good enough it can

It’s possible (maybe even likely) that “AI research” is “AGI-hard” in that any intelligence that can do it is already an AGI.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#516
post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs are a key piece of understanding that token sequences can trigger actions in the real world. AGI is here. You can trivially spin up a computer using agent to self improve itself to being a competent office worker

> You can trivially spin up a computer using agent to self improve itself to being a competent office worker If that was true, office workers would be being replaced at large scale and we'd know about it.

its happening right now, its just demo quality. it's being worked on now

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#517

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.

Similar experience here. These tools are so good for side stepping the one or two day grinds.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#518
post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. The ability to “talk to an expert” about any topic I’m curious about and ask very specific questions has been invaluable to me. It reminds me of being a kid and asking my grandpa a million questions, like how light bulbs worked, or what was inside his radio, or how do we have day and night. And before anyone talks about accuracy or hallucinations, these conversations usually are treated as starting off poi…

LLMs suffer from the "Igon Value Problem" https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Igon_Value_Problem Similar to reading a pop sci book, you're getting an entertainment from a thing with no actual understanding of the source material rather than an education.

So they have reached human level intelligence :D

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can divide your approach to asking questions with people (and I do believe this is something people do): 1. You ask someone you can trust for facts and opinions on topics, but you keep in mind that the answer might only be right in 90% of the cases. Also people tend to tell you if the are not sure. 2. For answers you need to rely on you ask people who are legally or professionally responsible if they give you wro…

If ChatGPT keeps giving you wrong answers wouldn’t this make paying customers leave? Effectively “losing its job”. But I guess you could say it acts more like the person that makes stuff up at work if they don’t know, instead of saying they don’t know.

> But I guess you could say it acts more like the person that makes stuff up at work if they don’t know, instead of saying they don’t know.

I have had language models tell me it doesn't know. Usually when using a RAG-based system like Perplexity, but they can say they don't know when prompted properly.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#520

I don't really care. I had to come up with a proposal to build a new R&D centre recently. To provide context on what our company does, I wrote a web scraper to scrape our own website (faster than going to IT) using Replit Agent and then fed that into O1 as context to come up with the proposal. In less than an hour. There is no going back.

both you and another highlynupvoted poster have said some versioj "never going back" or "dont want to go back" or "the tools that exist now are already insane"

And while I'm happy for you, I don't see the relevance? this post was not about "going back" or "stopping the use of AI tools" at all?

Post reply on HN