Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing deep research

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 445 posts

Re: Introducing deep research

#91

Post by spyckie2 »

rvnx wrote: post #83
tmnvdb wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peak HN comment

Doesn't make it untrue. Agents that can search the internet exist for a while now and have been essentially solved and happily used in platforms like Perplexity. It's really "meh", very far from revolutionary. Keep in mind this company is trying to convince everybody they need 500B USD now (through the Stargate project).

To go from partially automated to fully automated is thousands of non trivial edge cases and unforeseen decision points that must be tamed.

To say this is trivial is like saying the one shot ai prompted twitter clone is the same thing as twitter.

Peak HN indeed.

Re: Introducing deep research

#93

Post by Havoc »

The descriptions of the product sounded substantially more impressive than the actual samples tbh.

Still I think there is a big market for this sort of „go away for 30 mins and figure this out“ style agent

Re: Introducing deep research

#94

Post by panarky »

ADeerAppeared wrote: post #49

I'm sorry but what the fuck is this product pitch? Anyone who's done any kind of substantial document research knows that it's a NIGHTMARE of chasing loose ends & citogenesis. Trusting an LLM to critically evaluate every source and to be deeply suspect of any unproven claim is a ridiculous thing to do. These are not hard reasoning systems, they are probabilistic language models.

> they are probabilistic language models

This is like arguing an Airbus cannot possibly fly because it is 165 tonnes of aluminum, steel and plastic.

The proof is in the fact that it flies, not what it is constructed from.

Re: Introducing deep research

#95

Post by szvsw »

therealmarv wrote: post #92

I don't know. OpenAI is so bad in naming... the average person on the street will confuse Deepseek with Deep Research. Also not to forget o1, o3 ... 4o

> the average person on the street will confuse Deepseek with Deep Research.

That’s probably a feature not a bug (from OpenAI’s perspective…).

Re: Introducing deep research

#97

Post by tmnvdb »

rvnx wrote: post #67
tmnvdb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you are asking questions at the level of a cutting edge benchmark

This is one of the actual questions: > In Greek mythology, who was Jason's maternal great-grandfather? https://www.google.com/search?q=In+Greek+mythology%2C+who+wa...

This is a hard question for language models since it targets one of their known weaknesses.

Re: Introducing deep research

#98

Post by elicksaur »

rvnx wrote: post #67
tmnvdb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you are asking questions at the level of a cutting edge benchmark

This is one of the actual questions: > In Greek mythology, who was Jason's maternal great-grandfather? https://www.google.com/search?q=In+Greek+mythology%2C+who+wa...

In Greek mythology, Jason's maternal great-grandfather was Einstein.

Re: Introducing deep research

#99

Post by viraptor »

bonoboTP wrote: post #59
bbor wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never believed a conspiracy theory more instantly. Deep Search vs. DeepSeek is way more than enough to confuse the average layman! Especially when you're googling something you heard about at work a few hours ago, or on Bloomberg TV

You might as well say that DeepSeek wanted to cause confusion with DeepMind. Deep isn't such a distinguishing name, deep learning has been a buzzword since 2012.

Deepmind is not a consumer product. Gemini is part of it but nobody calls it deepmind.
Post reply on HN