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

GPT-4.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4.5

#101

Post by scythe »

tempaccount420 wrote: post #91
swatcoder wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We look forward to learning more about its strengths, capabilities, and potential applications in real-world settings. If GPT‑4.5 delivers unique value for your use case, your feedback (opens in a new window) will play an important role in guiding our decision. "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If…

> "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If you can figure something out, we need you to help us." Where is this quote from?

I believe it's a "translation" in the sense of Wittgenstein's goal of philosophy:

>My aim is: to teach you to pass from a piece of disguised nonsense to something that is patent nonsense.

Re: GPT-4.5

#102

Post by sebastiennight »

famouswaffles wrote: post #55
sebastiennight wrote: post #37

It is interesting that they are focusing a large part of this release on the model having a higher "EQ" (Emotional Quotient). We're far from the days of "this is not a person, we do not want to make it addictive" and getting a firm foot on the territory of "here's your new AI friend". This is very visible in the example comparing 4o with 4.5 when the user is complaining about failing a test, where 4o's response is wh…

The whole robotic, monotone, helpful assistant thing was something these companies had to actively hammer in during the post-training stage. It's not really how LLMs will sound by default after pre-training. I guess they're caring less and less about that effort especially since it hurts the model in some ways like creative writing.

If it's just a different choice during RLHF, I'll be curious to see what are the trade-offs in performance.

The "buddy in a chat group" style answers do not make me feel like asking it for a story will make the story long/detailed/poignant enough to warrant the difference.

I'll give it a try and compare on creative tasks.

Re: GPT-4.5

#103

Post by mvdtnz »

OpenAI doubling down on the American-style therapy-speak instead of focusing on usefulness. No thanks.

Re: GPT-4.5

#104

Post by dd3boh »

tempaccount420 wrote: post #91
swatcoder wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We look forward to learning more about its strengths, capabilities, and potential applications in real-world settings. If GPT‑4.5 delivers unique value for your use case, your feedback (opens in a new window) will play an important role in guiding our decision. "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If…

> "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If you can figure something out, we need you to help us." Where is this quote from?

I think it's supposed to be a translation of what OpenAI's quote means in real world terms.

Re: GPT-4.5

#105

Post by bhouston »

cheema33 wrote: post #85
logicchains wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>BTW Anthropic Claude 3.7 is better than o3-mini at coding at around 62-70% [1]. This means that I'll stick with Claude 3.7 for the time being for my open source alternative to Claude-code That's not a fair comparison as o3-mini is significantly cheaper. It's fine if your employer is paying, but on a personal project the cost of using Claude through the API is really noticeable.

> That's not a fair comparison as o3-mini is significantly cheaper. It's fine if your employer is paying... I use it via Cursor editor's built-in support for Claude 3.7. That caps the monthly expense to $20. There probably is a limit in Claude for these queries. But I haven't run into it yet. And I am a heavy user.

Agentic coders (e.g. aider, Claude-code, mycoder, codebuff, etc.) use a lot more tokens, but they write whole features for you and debug your code.

Re: GPT-4.5

#106

Post by wewewedxfgdf »

I feel like OpenAI is pursuing AGI when Anthropic/Claude is pursuing making AI awesome for practical things like coding.

I only ever using OpenAI's coding now as a double check against Claude.

Does OpenAI have their eyes on the ball?

Re: GPT-4.5

#107

Post by lblume »

Am I missing something, or do the results not even look that much better? Referring to the output quality, this just seems like a different prompting style and RLHF, not really an improved model at all.

Re: GPT-4.5

#108

Post by jsheard »

bguberfain wrote: post #78
ekojs wrote: post #12

> Because of this, we’re evaluating whether to continue serving it in the API long-term as we balance supporting current capabilities with building future models. Seems like it's not going to be deployed for long. $75.00 / 1M tokens for input $150.00 / 1M tokens for output That's crazy prices.

Until GPT-4.5, GPT-4 32K was certainly the most heavy model available at OpenAI. I can imagine the dilemma between to keep it running or stop it to free GPU for training new models. This time, OpenAI was clear whether to continue serving it in the API long-term.

> or stop it to free GPU for training new models.

Don't they use different hardware for inference and training? AIUI the former is usually done on cheaper GDDR cards and the latter is done on expensive HBM cards.

Re: GPT-4.5

#109

Post by TheAceOfHearts »

nialv7 wrote: post #99
sebastiennight wrote: post #37

It is interesting that they are focusing a large part of this release on the model having a higher "EQ" (Emotional Quotient). We're far from the days of "this is not a person, we do not want to make it addictive" and getting a firm foot on the territory of "here's your new AI friend". This is very visible in the example comparing 4o with 4.5 when the user is complaining about failing a test, where 4o's response is wh…

Well yeah, if the llm can keep you engaged and talking, that'll make them a lot more money; compared to if you just use it as a information retrieval tool in which case you are likely to leave after getting what you are looking for.

Since they offer a subscription, keeping you engaged just requires them to waste more compute. The ideal case would be that the LLM gives you a one shot correct response using as little compute as possible.

Re: GPT-4.5

#110

Post by dang »

mplewis wrote: post #4

[flagged]

Can you please stop breaking the site guidelines by posting unsubstantive comments / flamebait / calling names / etc.? You've been doing this repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Post reply on HN