R1 seems to be the only of these reasoning models that seem to have had gains in the creative writing side.
OpenAI O3-Mini
121–130 of 944 posts
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#122>developer messages looks like finally their threat model has been updated to take into account that the user might be too "unaligned" to be trusted with the ability to provide a system message of their own
If their models ever fail to keep ahead of the competition in terms of smarts, users are going to ditch them in mass for a competitor that doesn't treat their users like their enemy.
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#123"oh no DeepSeek copied our product it's not fair" > proceeds to release a product based on DeepSeek ah, alas the hypocrisy...
o3 was announced in December. R1 arguably builds off the rumored approach of o1 (LLM + RL) although with major efficiency gains. I'm not a big fan of OpenAI but it's the other way around.
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#124So far, it seems like this is the hierarchy o1 > GPT-4o > o3-mini > o1-mini > GPT-4o-mini o3 mini system card: https://cdn.openai.com/o3-mini-system-card.pdf
You cannot compare GPT-4o and o*(-mini) because GPT-4o is not a reasoning model.
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would actually love if it would just ask me simple questions (just yes/no) when its thinking about something i wasnt clear about and i could help it this way, its a bit sad seeing it write out the assumption and then take the wrong conclusion
You can run it locally, pause it when it thinks wrong and correct it's chain of thought.
Oh wow I did not know and dont have the hardware to run it locally unfortunately
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being able to see the thinking trace in R1 is so useful, as you can go back and see if it's getting stuck, making a wrong assumption, missing data, etc. To me that makes it materially more useful than the OpenAI reasoning models, which seem impressive, but are much harder to inspect/debug.
Running it locally lets you INTERJECT IN IT'S THINKING IN REALTIME and I cannot stress enough how useful that is.
You mean it reacts to you writing something while it's thinking of that you can stop it while it's thinking?
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#127Typical OpenAI release announcement where it turns out they're _actually_ doing some sort of delayed rollout and despite what the announcement says, no - you can't use o3-mini today.
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#128> While OpenAI o1 remains our broader general knowledge reasoning model, OpenAI o3-mini provides a specialized alternative for technical domains requiring precision and speed. I feel like this naming scheme is growing a little tired. o1 is for general knowledge reasoning, o3-mini replaces o1-mini but might be more specialized than o1 for certain technical domains...the "o" in "4o" is for "omni" (referring to its mult…
This is definitely intentional. You can like Sama or dislike him, but he knows how to market a product. Maybe this is a bad call on his part, but it is a call.
Not really. They’re successful because they created one of the most interesting products in human history, not because they have any idea how to brand it.
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#129> While OpenAI o1 remains our broader general knowledge reasoning model, OpenAI o3-mini provides a specialized alternative for technical domains requiring precision and speed. I feel like this naming scheme is growing a little tired. o1 is for general knowledge reasoning, o3-mini replaces o1-mini but might be more specialized than o1 for certain technical domains...the "o" in "4o" is for "omni" (referring to its mult…
The -mini postfix makes perfect sense, probably even clearer than the old "turbo" wording. Naturally, the latest small model may be better than larger older models... but not always and not necessarily in everything. What you'd expect from a -mini model is exactly what is delivered. The non-reasoning line was also pretty straightforward. Newer base models get a larger prefix number and some postfixes like 'o' were ad…
> I wonder if we'll end up with both a 4o and o4...
The perplexing thing is that someone has to have said that, right? It has to have been brought up in some meeting when they were brainstorming names that if you have 4o and o1 with the intention of incrementing o1 you'll eventually end up with an o4.
Where they really went off the rails was not just bailing when they realized they couldn't use o2. In that moment they had the chance to just make o1 a one-off weird name and go down a different path for its final branding.
OpenAI just struggles with names in general, though. ChatGPT was a terrible name picked by engineers for a product that wasn't supposed to become wildly successful, and they haven't really improved at it since.
Re: OpenAI O3-Mini
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think OpenAI is training on your data. At least they say they don't, and I believe that. I wouldn't be surprised if the NSA or something has access to data if they request it or something though. But DeepSeek clearly states in their terms of service that they can train on your API data or use it for other purposes. Which one might assume their government can access as well. We need direct eval comparisons bet…
OpenAI clearly states that they train on your data https://help.openai.com/en/articles/5722486-how-your-data-is...
By default, we do not train on any inputs or outputs from our products for business users, including ChatGPT Team, ChatGPT Enterprise, and the API. We offer API customers a way to opt-in to share data with us, such as by providing feedback in the Playground, which we then use to improve our models. Unless they explicitly opt-in, organizations are opted out of data-sharing by default.
The business bit is confusing, I guess they see the API as a business product, but they do not train on API data.