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

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#671

Post by bubaumba »

wokwokwok wrote: post #593
NitpickLawyer wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's provable; if just chaining LLMs are a particular size into agentic systems could scale indefinitely, then you could use a 1-param LLM and get AGI. You can't. QED. Perhaps I missunderstand your reply, but that has not been my experience at all. There are 3 types of "agentic" behaviour that has worked for a while for me, and I don't know how else it would work without "agents": 1. Task decomposition - this was m…

I didn’t say they don’t work, I said there is an upper bound on the function they provide. If a discrete system can be composed of multiple LLMs the upper bound on the function they provide is by the function of the LLM, not the number of agents. Ie. We have agentic systems. Saying “wait till you see those agentic systems!” is like saying “wait til you see those c++ programs!” Yes. I see them. Mmm. Ok. I don’t think…

> if the underlying LLMs dont get any better, there is no reason to expect the system built out of them to get any better.

Actually o1, o3 are doing exactly this, and very well. I.e. explicitly: by proper orchestration the same LLM can do much better job. There is a price, but...

> you would expect to be able to build agentic systems out of much smaller LLMs

Good point, it should be possible to do it on a high-end pc or even embedded.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#672

Post by Biologist123 »

anshumankmr wrote: post #669
netdevphoenix wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 is dangerous to assume that LLMs are experts on any topic. With or without quotes. You are getting a super fast journalist intern with a huge memory but inability to reason critically, lacking understanding about anything and huge unreliability when it comes to answering questions (you…

They have tried to address it with the help of o1 or o3 model at least to help it understand and reason better than before, but one of the quotes my manager says with regards to these is to trust it but verify it also.

“Believe in God, but tie up your camels”.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#673

Post by HPsquared »

atonse wrote: post #457
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…

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…

The amount of value creation is off the scale. It's like when people started using Google, or Google maps.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#674

Post by Biologist123 »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #640
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…

> 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 is dangerous to assume that LLMs are experts on any topic. With or without quotes. You are getting a super fast journalist intern with a huge memory but inability to reason critically, lacking understanding about anything and huge unreliability when it comes to answering questions (you…

But hasn’t it become quite easy to deal with this issue simply by asking for the sources of the information and then validating? I quite like using the consensus app and then asking for specific academic paper references which I can then quickly check. However this has taught me also that academic claims must also be validated…

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#675

Post by bubaumba »

vbezhenar wrote: post #652
foolfoolz wrote: post #294

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

AGI is special. Because one day AI can start improving itself autonomously. At this point singularity occurs and nobody knows what will happen. When human started to improve himself, we built the civilisation, we became a super-predator, we dried out seas and changed climate of the entire planet. We extinguished entire species of animals and adapted other species for our use. Huge changes. AI could bring changes of g…

> AGI is special. Because one day AI can start improving itself autonomously

AGI can be sub-human, right? That's probably how it will start. The question will be is it already AGI or not yet, i.e. where to set the boundary. So, at first that will be humans improving AGI, but then... I'm afraid it can get so much better that humans will be literally like macaques in comparison.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#676

Post by fxtentacle »

ithadtobe119 wrote: post #638
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…

(throwaway account because of what I'm about to say, but it needs to be said) While my main use case for LLMs is coding just like most people here, there are lots of areas that are being ignored. Did you know llama 3.X models have been trained as psychotherapists? It's been invaluable to dump and discuss feelings with it in ways I wouldn't trust any regular person. When real therapists also cost more than what people…

I remember seeing an article discussed here on HN a while ago about OnlyFans creators using LLMs to automate the pretend personal relationship with paying fans.

Isn't that exactly what you suggest? A paid one-sided relationship that helps people feel better about themselves, with a bit of naughtiness mixed in.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#677

Post by mkl »

arthurcolle wrote: post #516
mkl wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

So it's not trivial and you don't have competent AI office workers.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#678

Post by nuancebydefault »

croes wrote: post #499
brookst wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you address this problem with people? More than once a real live person has told me something that was wrong,

Experience. If I recognize they give unreliable answers on a specific topic I don’t question them anymore on that topic. If they lie on purpose I don’t ask them anything anymore. The real experts give reliable answers, LLMs don’t. The same question can yield different results.

It's not that black and white. I know of no single person who is correct all the time. And if I would know such person, i still would not be sure, since he would outsmart me.

I trust some LLMs more than most people because their BS rate is much much lower than most people I know.

For my work, that is easy to verify. Just try out the code, try out the tool or read more about the scientific topic. Ask more questions around it if needed. In the end it all just works and that's an amazing accomplishment. There's no way back.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#679

Post by ithadtobe119 »

atq2119 wrote: post #670
ithadtobe119 wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(throwaway account because of what I'm about to say, but it needs to be said) While my main use case for LLMs is coding just like most people here, there are lots of areas that are being ignored. Did you know llama 3.X models have been trained as psychotherapists? It's been invaluable to dump and discuss feelings with it in ways I wouldn't trust any regular person. When real therapists also cost more than what people…

> 60% of gen Z men are single, 30% women I always do a double take when I read such statistics. How can they possibly add up? Are gen Z men considered particularly undesirable leading to lots of relationships with large age gaps? Is there a ridiculously large overhang of gay women (over men)? Is there a huge number of men with multiple partners? These gender disparities are difficult enough to believe when they come…

I think I recall that being somewhat disputed because the relationship status was self reported, some suggested that men might not consider certain types of relationships as serious but women do, so there's a disparity in reporting what is and isn't an actual relationship and the reality might be more balanced. Sweden statistics, xd.

From what I can find after a brief search, there's this one [0] that claims 63% for men, 34% for women, and [1] there's a a generally known toxicity around dating these days that makes these numbers entirely believable. I don't pretend to have a large enough network of acquaintances to make a good guess, but hardly anyone I know isn't single, and I know maybe two or three religious types that are actually married.

As for gen Z men being especially undesirable, there's well... [2].

[0] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/08/for-valen...

[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/GenZ/comments/1eo9bzj/interesting_b...

[2] https://www.ft.com/content/29fd9b5c-2f35-41bf-9d4c-994db4e12...

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#680

Post by ithadtobe119 »

fxtentacle wrote: post #676
ithadtobe119 wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(throwaway account because of what I'm about to say, but it needs to be said) While my main use case for LLMs is coding just like most people here, there are lots of areas that are being ignored. Did you know llama 3.X models have been trained as psychotherapists? It's been invaluable to dump and discuss feelings with it in ways I wouldn't trust any regular person. When real therapists also cost more than what people…

I remember seeing an article discussed here on HN a while ago about OnlyFans creators using LLMs to automate the pretend personal relationship with paying fans. Isn't that exactly what you suggest? A paid one-sided relationship that helps people feel better about themselves, with a bit of naughtiness mixed in.

Ah shit you're right, I forgot about that, yeah they are absolutely on it. I guess it makes more profit for people to believe that they're actually talking to a real person if they can't tell the difference anyway.
Post reply on HN