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

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#791

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

jpablo wrote: post #753
jaybna wrote: post #741

25% of the top 1000 websites are blocking OpenAI from crawling: https://originality.ai/ai-bot-blocking I am betting hundreds of thousands, rising to millions more little sites, will start blocking/gating this year. AI companies might license from big sources (you can see the blocking percentage went down), but they will be missing the long tail, where a lot of great novel training data lives. And then the big sites w…

They aren't blocking anything. They are just asking nicely not to be crawled. Given that AI companies haven't cared a single bit about ripping of other's peoples data I don't see why they would care now.

In their attempt to block OpenAI, they block me. Many sites that were accessible just 2 years ago, require login/captchas/rectal exam now just to read the content.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#793

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

sekai wrote: post #700
rwyinuse wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet that 20w brain can make me a sandwich and bring it to me, while state of the art AI models will fail that task. Until we get major advances in robotics and models designed to control them, true AGI will be nowhere near.

> Until we get major advances in robotics and models designed to control them, true AGI will be nowhere near. AGI has nothing to do with robotics, if AGI is achieved it will help push robotics and every single scientific field further with progression never seen before, imagine a million AGIs running in parallel focused on a single field.

We already have that. It's called civilization.

Maybe you mean quadrillions of AGIs?

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#794

Post by EricMausler »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #765
jaybna wrote: post #741

25% of the top 1000 websites are blocking OpenAI from crawling: https://originality.ai/ai-bot-blocking I am betting hundreds of thousands, rising to millions more little sites, will start blocking/gating this year. AI companies might license from big sources (you can see the blocking percentage went down), but they will be missing the long tail, where a lot of great novel training data lives. And then the big sites w…

Doing basic copyright analyses on model outputs is all that is needed. Check if the output contains copyright, block it if it does. Transformers aren't zettabyte sized archives with a smart searching algo, running around the web stuffing everything they can into their datacenter sized storage. They are typically a few dozen GB in size, if that. They don't copy data, they move vectors in a high dimensional space based…

No comment on if output analysis is all that is needed, though it makes sense to me. Just wanted to note that using file size differences as an argument may simply imply transformers could be a form of (either very lossy or very efficient) compression.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#795

Post by wokwokwok »

bubaumba wrote: post #671
wokwokwok wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> but that overwhelmingly doesn’t work.

MCTS will be the next big “thing”; not agents.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#796

Post by aftbit »

jaybna wrote: post #741

25% of the top 1000 websites are blocking OpenAI from crawling: https://originality.ai/ai-bot-blocking I am betting hundreds of thousands, rising to millions more little sites, will start blocking/gating this year. AI companies might license from big sources (you can see the blocking percentage went down), but they will be missing the long tail, where a lot of great novel training data lives. And then the big sites w…

IMO this is an underappreciated advantage for Google. Nobody wants to block the GoogleBot, so they can continue to scrape for AI data long after AI-specific companies get blocked.

Gemini is currently embarrassingly bad given it came from the shop that:

1. invented the Transformer architecture

2. has (one of) the largest compute clusters on the planet

3. can scrape every website thanks to a long-standing whitelist

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#797

Post by kevinsync »

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…

I actually find LLMs lacking true expertise to be a feature, not a bug. Most of the time I'm starting from a place of no knowledge on a topic that's novel to me, I ask some questions, it replies with summaries, keywords, names of things, basic concepts. I enter with the assumption that it's really no different than googling phrases and sifting through results (except I don't know what phrases I'm supposed to be googling in the first place), so the summaries help a lot. I then ask a lot of questions and ask for examples and explanations, some of which of course turn out to be wrong, but the more I push back, re-generate, re-question, etc (while using traditional search engines in another tab), the better responses I can get it to provide.

Come to think of it, it's really no different than walking into Home Depot and asking "the old guys" working in the aisles about stuff -- you can access some fantastic knowledge if you know the names of all the tools and techniques, and if not, can show them a picture or describe what you're trying to do and they'll at least point you in a starting direction with regards to names of tools needed, techniques to use, etc.

Just like I don't expect Home Depot hourly worker Grandpa Bob to be the end-all-be-all expert (for free, as well!), neither do I expect ChatGPT to be an all-knowing-all-encompassing oracle of knowledge.

It'll probably get you 95% of the way there though!

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#798

Post by shafyy »

brookst wrote: post #684
shafyy wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM proponents really have succeeded in moving the overton window on this discussion. "Sure, you cannot trust LLMs, but you cannot trust humans, either".

I don’t think “Overton window” works in that construction. It typically refers to the range of politically acceptable opinions. LLMs are too new to have such a thing. It sounds like you’re an “LLM opponent” (whatever that means) who believes the appropriate standard is infallibility? I don’t even get that line of thinking, but you’re welcome to it. But let’s not pretend this is a decades-long topic with a social cons…

I didn't mean overton window in a political sense (not a English native speaker). It's more about moving the goal post maybe.

> I don’t even get that line of thinking, but you’re welcome to it

I would not say "LLM oponent". Rather "LLM critic". I'm not against LLMs as a technology. I'm worried about how the technology is deployed and used, and what the consequences are. Specifically, copyright issues, power use issues, inherent biases in the traning data that strengthen existing discrimation against minorities, raciscm and sexism. I'm not convinced by the hype created by LLM proponents (mostly investors and other companies and people who financially benefit from LLMs). I'm not saying that machine learning doesn't bring any value or does not have use cases. I'm talking more about the recent AI/LLM hype.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#799

Post by EricMausler »

hengheng wrote: post #742
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…

My personal criterion for calling somebody an expert, or "educated", or a "scholar" is that they have any random area of expertise where they really know their shit. And as a consequence, they know where that area of expertise ends. And they know what half-knowing something feels like compared to really knowing something. And thus, they will preface and qualify their statements. LLMs don't do any of that. I don't kno…

Anecdotal but I told chatgpt to include it's level of confidence in its answers and to let me know if it didn't know something. This priming resulted in it starting almost every answer with some variation of "I'm not sure, but.." when I asked it vague / speculative questions and then when I asked it direct matter of fact questions with easy answers it would answer with confidence.

That's not to say I think it is rationalizing it's own level of understanding, but that somewhere in the vector space it seems to have a Gradient for speculative language. If primed to include language about it, it could help cut down on some of the hallucination. No idea if this will effect the rate of false positives on the statements it does still answer confidently however

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#800

Post by tiffanyh »

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…

I have the opposite reaction.

AI right now feels like that MBA person at work.

They don’t know anything.

But because they sound like they are speaking with authority & confidence, allows them to get promoted at work.

(While all of the experts at work roll their eyes because they know the MBA/AI is just spitting out nonsense & wish the company never had any MBA/AI people)

Post reply on HN