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

621–630 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#621

Post by namaria »

dkobia wrote: post #232
t_serpico wrote: post #208

One fundamental challenge to me is that if each training run because more and more expensive, the time it takes it to learn what works/doesn't work widens. Half a billion dollars for training a model is already nuts, but if it takes 100 iterations to perfect it, you've cumulatively spent 50 billion dollars... Smaller models may actually be where rapid innovation continues simply because of tighter feedback loops. O3…

AGI is the Sisyphean task of our age. We’ll push this boulder up the mountain because we have to, even if it kills us.

A task that is completed and kills us is pretty much the opposite of a Sisyphean task.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#622

Post by arcanemachiner »

rkagerer wrote: post #550
SamPatt wrote: post #415

I'm sure the debate over the definition of AGI is important and will continue for a while, but... I can't care about it anymore. Between Perplexity searching and summarizing, Claude explaining, and qwen (and other tools) coding, I'm already as happy as can be with whatever you want to call this level of intelligence. Just today I used a completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama. It worked great. Maybe it won…

completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama Could you elaborate? Was it easy to install?

Not OP, but yeah, ollama is super easy to install.

I just installed the Docker version and created a little wrapper script which starts and stops the container. Installing different models is trivial.

I think I already had CUDA set up, not sure if that made a difference. But it's quick and easy. Set it up, fuck around for an hour or so while you get things working, then you've got your own local LLM you can spin up whenever you want.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#623

Post by [deleted] »

sollewitt wrote: post #493
atonse wrote: 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.

[deleted]

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#624

Post by cowsaymoo »

saagarjha wrote: post #614
FergusArgyll wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, so often I see/hear people asking "But how can you trust it?!" I'm asking it a question about social dynamics in the USSR, what's the worst thing that'll happen?! I'll get the wrong impression? What are people using this for? are you building a nuclear reactor where every mistake is catastrophic? Almost none of my interactions with LLMs "Matter", they are things I'm curious about, if 10 out of 100 things I learn…

Yes, but how do you know which is which?

That is also a broader epistemological question one could ask about truth on the internet or even truth in general. You have to interrogate reality

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#625

Post by reissbaker »

sollewitt wrote: post #493
atonse wrote: 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.

Earlier in this thread, people mention the counterpoint to this: they Google the information from the LLM and do more reading. It's an excellent starting point for researching a topic: you can't trust everything it says, but if you don't know where to start, it will very likely get you to a good place to start researching.

Similarly, while you can't fully trust everything a journalist says, it's obviously better to have journalism than to have nothing: the "Ikon Value Problem" doesn't mean that journalism should be eradicated. Pre-LLMs, we really had nothing like LLMs in this way.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#626

Post by twometwo »

jacobolus wrote: post #573
jstummbillig wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A pop sci fi book can be written by someone who knows the topic and reviewed by people who know the topic — and a history book can also not. LLM generated answers are more comparable to ad-hoc human expert's answers and not to written books. But it's much simpler to statistically evaluate and correct them. That is how we can know that, on average, LLMs are improving and are outperforming human experts on an increasin…

In my experience LLM generated answers are more comparable to an ad-hoc answer by a human with no special expertise, moderate google skills, but good bullshitting skills spending a few minutes searching the web, reading what they find and synthesizing it, waiting long enough for the details to get kind of hazy, and then writing up an answer off the top of their head based on that, filling in any missing material by j…

I am just curious about this. You said the word never, and I think your claim can be tested, perhaps you could post a list of five obscure questions for a LLM to answer and then someone could ask that to a good LLM for you, or an expert in that field, to assess the value of the answers.

Edited: I just submitted an ASK HN post about this.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#627

Post by swiftcoder »

reissbaker wrote: post #625
sollewitt wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Earlier in this thread, people mention the counterpoint to this: they Google the information from the LLM and do more reading. It's an excellent starting point for researching a topic: you can't trust everything it says, but if you don't know where to start, it will very likely get you to a good place to start researching. Similarly, while you can't fully trust everything a journalist says, it's obviously better to h…

> they Google the information from the LLM and do more reading

The runway on this one seems to be running out fast - how long before all the google results are also non-expert opinions regurgitated by LLMs?

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#628

Post by ninetyninenine »

SamPatt wrote: post #415

I'm sure the debate over the definition of AGI is important and will continue for a while, but... I can't care about it anymore. Between Perplexity searching and summarizing, Claude explaining, and qwen (and other tools) coding, I'm already as happy as can be with whatever you want to call this level of intelligence. Just today I used a completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama. It worked great. Maybe it won…

The definition of agi is a linguistic problem but people confuse it for a philosophical problem. Think about it. The term is basically just a classification and what features and qualities fit the classification is an arbitrary and linguistic choice.

The debate stems from a delusion and failure to realize that people are simply picking and choosing different fringe features on what qualifies as agi. Additionally the term exists in a fuzzy state inside our minds as well. It’s not that the concept is profound. It’s that some of the features that define the classification of the term we aren’t sure about. But this doesn’t matter because we are basically just unsure about the definition of a term that we completely made up arbitrarily.

For example the definition of consciousness seems like a profound debate but it’s not. The word consciousness is a human invention and the definition is vague because we choose the definition to be ill defined, vague and controversial.

Much of the debate on this stuff is purely as I stated just a language issue.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#629

Post by delusional »

SamPatt wrote: post #415

I'm sure the debate over the definition of AGI is important and will continue for a while, but... I can't care about it anymore. Between Perplexity searching and summarizing, Claude explaining, and qwen (and other tools) coding, I'm already as happy as can be with whatever you want to call this level of intelligence. Just today I used a completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama. It worked great. Maybe it won…

As a consumer you should always evaluate the product that is in front of you, not the one they promise in 6 months. If what's there is valuable to you, then that's great.

When we discuss the potential AGI we're not talking as consumers, we're talking about the business side. If AGI is not reached, you'll see an absolutely enormous market correction, as it realizes that the product is not going to replace any human workers.

The current generation of products are not profitable. They're investments towards that AGI dream. If that dream doesn't happen, then the current generation of stuff will disappear too, as it becomes impossible to provide at a cost you'd be comfortable with.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#630

Post by jeffhuys »

silisili wrote: post #565
josu wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has replaced ~50% of my Google searches.

Yes but it also hasn't been attacked by ads yet. Google doesn't suck for lack of search results, it sucks because of ads. Imagine asking chatgpt to tell you about slopes in Colorado, and the first five answers are about how awesome North Face is and how you can order from them. You probably wouldn't use it as much.

Local models are GOOD as well, and easy to use (ollama + open web ui). OpenAI has to perform a huge trick in order to stay relevant.
Post reply on HN