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

271–280 of 445 posts

Re: Introducing deep research

#271

Post by yorwba »

albert_e wrote: post #258
stonogo wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a sort of unofficial trade association where they coalesce on specific redefinitions of terms to meet their sales and PR efforts. First they came for "intelligence," then "open source," then "reason," and it will continue. Any word which the PR wants but they can't achieve gets redefined -- "grok" is a perfect example, since in the original sci-fi book it meant "total understanding." The mythological Triton rule…

Also "accuracy" as a measure of model's performance used to mean something objective in the traditional ML world. Now with LLMs it is what human evaluators feel about the LLM output?

Traditional ML is no stranger to measuring accuracy in terms of agreement with human evaluators.

Re: Introducing deep research

#272

Post by rsanek »

reaperman wrote: post #116
cj wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone selling anything would want to remain crawlable if people use this to research something that could lead to a purchase.

Not necessarily. Southwest airlines doesnt allow itself on price comparison sites or Google Flights. Amazon listings are blocked from google shopping and other price comparison sites.

they finally bowed mid last year https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/travel/southwest-google-f...

Re: Introducing deep research

#273

Post by rsanek »

sockaddr wrote: post #206
tomrod wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new term for this is "AI Loopidity", highlighting the unintelligent ouroboros nature of one side using AI to generate content and then another side to consume content.

Similar to “Bullshit jobs” All the AI commercials are designed to appeal to people that don’t produce any actual value but haven’t been detected by the system yet. Need to send email to boss? Press magic button! Job well done, idiot. Someone send you big scary email? Press magic button! Good job dummy! Someone wants to go eat some Italian with you, push magic button for totally not-ad result. Enjoy your Olive Garden,…

i think the apple ads are the poster child here. hopefully we can see more inventive ones than just serving lazy people.

Re: Introducing deep research

#275

Post by n4r9 »

autoconfig wrote: post #89
hi_hi wrote: post #56

This is terrifying. Even though they acknowledge the issues with hallucinations/errors, that is going to be completely overlooked by everyone using this, and then injecting the outputs into their own powerpoints. Management Consulting was bad enough before the ability to mass produce these graphs and stats on a whim. At least there was some understanding behind the scenes of where the numbers came from, and sources w…

Either you care about being correct or you don't. If you don't care then it doesn't matter whether you made it up or the AI did. If you care then you'll fact check before publishing. I don't see why this changes.

It's a bit like saying "my kids are going to hit themselves anyway, so it doesn't matter if I give them foam rods or metal rods".

Re: Introducing deep research

#276

Post by [deleted] »

elashri wrote: post #240

It is actually interesting for people working in academia. I would like to test it but no way I can afford $200/m right now. Can someone test it with this prompt. "As a research assistant with comprehensive knowledge of particle physics, please provide a detailed analysis of next-generation particle collider projects currently under consideration by the international physics community. The analysis should encompass t…

[deleted]

Re: Introducing deep research

#277

Post by GeoAtreides »

RandomWorker wrote: post #232

I’m a researcher and honestly not worried. 1. Developing the right question has always been the largest barrier to great research. Not sure OpenAI can develop the right question without the Human experience. The second biggest part of my role is influencing people that my questions are the right questions. Which is made easier when you have a thorough understanding of the first. That being said, I’m sure there will b…

> Developing the right question has always been the largest barrier to great research.

I thought funding was the biggest barrier to great research

Re: Introducing deep research

#278

Post by DrSiemer »

scarab92 wrote: post #90
hi_hi wrote: post #56

This is terrifying. Even though they acknowledge the issues with hallucinations/errors, that is going to be completely overlooked by everyone using this, and then injecting the outputs into their own powerpoints. Management Consulting was bad enough before the ability to mass produce these graphs and stats on a whim. At least there was some understanding behind the scenes of where the numbers came from, and sources w…

Think of it like a vaccine. The majority of human written consultant reports are already complete rubbish. Low accuracy, low signal-to-noise, generic platitudes in a quantity-over-quality format. LLMs are innoculating people to this kind of low information value content. People who produce LLM quality output, are now being accused of using LLMs, and can no longer pretend to be adding value. The result of this is goin…

Exactly what will happen with art. The tolerance for low quality output will decrease.

Re: Introducing deep research

#280

Post by baal80spam »

itkovian_ wrote: post #122
YmiYugy wrote: post #24

If I understood the graphs correctly, it only achieves 20% pass rate on their internal tests. So I have to wait 30min and pay a lot of money just to sift through walls of most likely incorrect text? Unless the possibility of hallucinations is negligible, this is just way too much content to review at once. The process probably needs to be a lot more iterative.

Here's an example of the type of question it is acheiving 20% on; The set of natural transformations between two functors F,G ⁣:C→DF,G:C→D can be expressed as the end Nat(F,G)≅∫AHomD(F(A),G(A)). Nat(F,G)≅∫A HomD (F(A),G(A)). Define set of natural cotransformations from FF to GG to be the coend CoNat(F,G)≅∫AHomD(F(A),G(A)). CoNat(F,G)≅∫AHomD (F(A),G(A)). Let: - F=B∙(Σ4)∗/F=B∙ (Σ4 )∗/ be the under ∞∞-category of the ne…

That's easy Dave: 42.
Post reply on HN