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

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#871

Post by ComplexSystems »

coldtea wrote: post #267
ComplexSystems wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There is no evidence that LLMs are the roadmap to AGI." - There's plenty of evidence. What do you think the last few years have been all about? Hell, GPT-4 would already have qualified as AGI about a decade ago.

> What do you think the last few years have been all about? Next token language-based predictors with no more intelligence than brute force GIGO which parrot existing human intelligence captured as text/audio and fed in the form of input data. 4o agrees: "What you are describing is a language model or next-token predictor that operates solely as a computational system without inherent intelligence or understanding. T…

What do you think "AGI" is supposed to be?

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#872

Post by devsda »

cma wrote: post #821
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…

People upload lots from those sites to chatgpt asking to summarize.

That's still manual and minuscule compared to the amount they can gather by scraping.

If blocking really becomes a problem, they can take a page out of Google's playbook[1] and develop a browser extension to scrape page content and in exchange offer some free credits for Chat-GPT or a summarizer type of tool(s). There won't be shortage of users.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Toolbar

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#873

Post by a_wild_dandan »

dmix wrote: post #832
anonzzzies wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try to sprinkle 'for us/me' everywhere as much as I can; we work on LoB/ERP apps mostly. These are small frontends to massive multi million line backends. We carved a niche by providing the frontends on these backends live at the client office by a business consultant of ours: they simply solve UX issues for the client on top of large ERP by using our tool and prompting. Everything looks modern, fresh and nice; unl…

> It's fast and no frontend people are needed for it I guess if you don’t need to maintain it, just an ever growing blob of complexity that will be reinvented into new blobs every time when the old one becomes too immobile :)

So...nothing will change?

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#874

Post by ttul »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #216
exhaze wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the wildest thing is actually Meta’s latest paper where they show a method for LLMs reasoning not in English, but in latent space https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.06769 I’ve done research myself adjacent to this (mapping parts of a latent space onto a manifold), but this is a bit eerie, even to me.

It's just concept space. The entire LLM works in this space once the embedding layer is done. It's not really that novel at all.

This was my thought. Literally everything inside a neural network is a “latent space”. Straight from the embeddings that you use to map categorical features in the first layer.

Latent space is where the magic literally happens.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#875

Post by worik »

coffeemug wrote: post #389
worik wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that is what AGI looks like. There may well be an upper limit on cognition (we are not really sure what cognition is - even as we do it) and it may be that human minds are close to it.

Very unlikely, for the reason that human minds evolved under extremely tight energy constraints. AI has no such limitation.

Since we do not know what cognition is we are all whistling in the dark.

Energy may be a constraint, it may not. What we do not know is likely to matter more than what we do

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#876

Post by input_sh »

cedws wrote: post #751
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…

Cloudflare has a toggle for blocking AI scrapers. I don’t think it’s default, but it’s there.

It's not much smarter than just adding user agents to robots.txt manually.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#877

Post by FrustratedMonky »

gizmo wrote: post #838
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but, then what? If you throw away all of the books from experts, what do you do, go out in your backyard and start running experiments to re-create all of science? Or start googling? What, some random person on the internet is going to be a better 'expert' than someone that wrote a book? Books might not be great, but they are at least some minimum bar to reach. You had to do some study and analysis. Seems like…

Many terrific books have been published in the past 500 years. The median book is not worth your time, however, and neither is the top 10%. You cannot possibly read everything so you have to be very selective or you will read only dreck. This is the opposite of being anti-science or anti-education.

But compared to the content on the internet?

So

Top 10% of Books. Ok

90 % of Books. marginal, lot of bad.

Internet. Just millions of pages of junk.

- Books still take some effort. So why not start there.

It isn't either/or, binary, a lot of books are bad, so guess I'll learn my medical degree from browsing the web because I don't trust those 'experts'.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#878

Post by coliveira »

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…

How do you know the AI didn't hallucinate the answers? For topics like these, where there is little information available, the probability of hallucination is very high.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#879

Post by coliveira »

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…

AIs are a "master of all trades", so it is very unlikely they'll ever be able to admit they don't know something. What makes them very unreliable with topics where there is little available knowledge.

Re: GPT-5 is behind schedule

#880

Post by kjkjadksj »

dyauspitr wrote: post #451
numpad0 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an LLM can't be left to do mowing by itself, but a human will have to closely monitor and intervene at every its steps, then it's just a super fast predictive keyboard, no?

But what if the human only has to intervene once every 100 hours, that’s a huge productivity boost.

And one might also wonder still if we need a general language model to mow the grass or just a simpler solution towards to problem of driving a mower over a fixed property line automatically. Something you could probably solve with wwii era technology, honestly.
Post reply on HN