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

711–720 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#711

Post by acyou »

nialv7 wrote: post #97
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…

> OpenAI’s next moat I don't think oai has any moat at all. If you look around, QwQ from Alibaba is already pushing o1-preview performances. I think oai is only ahead by 3~6 months at most.

That is why being #2 in technical product development can be great. Someone else pays to work out the kinks, copy what works and improve on it at a fraction of the cost. You see it time and time again.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#712

Post by SamPatt »

nico wrote: post #526
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…

> Just today I used a completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama. It worked great What’s it called? Could you post a link please? Thank you

Here you go

https://github.com/TheBlewish/Automated-AI-Web-Researcher-Ol...

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#713

Post by FrustratedMonky »

wilg wrote: post #549
intended wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s trivial to address this. You ask an actual expert. I don’t treat any water cooler conversation as accurate. It’s for fun and socializing.

Asking an expert is only trivial if you have access to an expert to ask!

And as we've seen in last few years, large chunks of population do not trust experts.

Think this thread has gone from "how to Trust AI", to "how do we Trust Anything".

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#714

Post by michaelbuckbee »

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…

What was the AI search tool?

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#715

Post by MacsHeadroom »

indeed30 wrote: post #690
gizmo wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who are experts (PhD and 20 years of experience) often have very dumb opinions in their field of expertise. Experts make amateur mistakes too. Look at the books written by expert economists, expert psychologists, expert historians, expert philosophers, expert software engineers. Most books are not worth the paper they're written on, despite the authors being experts with decades of experience in their respecti…

I don't disagree with what you say, but one difference is that we generally hold these people accountable and often shift liability to them when they are wrong (though not always, admittedly), which is not something I have ever seen done with any AI system.

This sounds like an argument in favor of AI personhood, not an argument against AI experts.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#716

Post by Flenkno »

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.

when i tried studying, i got really frustrated because i had to search for so many things and not a lot of people would explain basic math things to me in a simple way.

LLMs do already a lot better job at this. A lot faster, accurate enough and easy to use.

I can now study something alone which i was not able to do before.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#717

Post by vbezhenar »

karel-3d wrote: post #693

I have to say I finally "caved in" to LLMs last month. While I still think Copilot is useless, I recently had a very complex code that did a lot of crazy bit-flipping and xoring, and I had no idea what is it doing, so I threw it to ChatGPT.. and it knew what it was doing. I also needed to rewrite this code to PHP (for... reasons) while I know very little PHP. And it did that! It was a bit wrong, I needed to correct a…

Effectively using AI tools is a skill. Much like effectively using Google is a skill. You already saw glimpses of what it can do. I suggest you to keep trying to find out boundaries where it works reliably and where it does not.

I'm using Copilot daily. I don't use it to write code instead of me. But I'm using it to generate lots of obvious code just the same way that I would do. I know when to expect it to do its work perfectly and I know when I need to supervise it. I know when I'd spend more time editing generated code so I'd write that code myself and I know when I'd spend less time editing generated code.

I don't think that AI brings 10x or even 2x to my productivity, so you can avoid using AI. But I certainly can say, that using Copilot makes programming less tenuous in the same way using autocomplete, autoimports and similar IDE stuff makes programming less tenuous.

I also think that whether copilot helps or not depends on type of code that you're writing. If you're very careful about DRY and your language does not have much boilerplate, may be you'd find it less useful. For example when I'm writing Go, every second line is of kind `if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("Cannot bla: %w", err); }`. The only "intellectual" part here is error message and Copilot generates it 99% perfectly along with surrounding stuff.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#718

Post by cbau »

swiftcoder wrote: post #627
reissbaker wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You can turn to actual experts, e.g. YouTube or books. But yes, I have recently had the misfortune of working with a personal trainer who was using ChatGPT to come up with training programs, and it felt confusing and like I was wasting time and money.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#719

Post by uxhacker »

gizmo wrote: post #686
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…

People who are experts (PhD and 20 years of experience) often have very dumb opinions in their field of expertise. Experts make amateur mistakes too. Look at the books written by expert economists, expert psychologists, expert historians, expert philosophers, expert software engineers. Most books are not worth the paper they're written on, despite the authors being experts with decades of experience in their respecti…

A Call to expertise is actually a fallacy. This is because experts can be wrong.

The scientific method relies on evidence and reproducible results, not authority alone.

Edited to add a reference: see under Appeal to authority. https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/fallacies/

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#720

Post by ranyume »

mort96 wrote: post #648
LASR wrote: post #610

So the team I lead does a lot of research around all the “plumbing” around LLMs. Both technical and from a product-market perspectives. What I’ve learned is that for the most part that AI revolution is not going to be because of PHD-level LLMs. It will be because people are better equipped to use the high-schooler level LLMs to do their work more efficiently. We have some knowledge graph experiments where LLMs contin…

Honestly I wish you people would stop forcing this "AI revolution" on us. It's not good. It's not useful. It's not creating value. It's not "another team member"; other team members have their own minds with their own ideas and their own opinions. Your autocomplete takes my attention away from what I want to write and replaces it with what you want me to write. We don't want it.

OP's talking about a specific use-case related to tech companies like Google. Not creative writing or research, areas in which AI is in no shape for supporting humans with it's current safety alignment.
Post reply on HN