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

OpenAI Progress

progress.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 372 posts

Re: OpenAI Progress

#11

Post by jascha_eng »

simianwords wrote: post #7

My interpretation of the progress. 3.5 to 4 was the most major leap. It went from being a party trick to legitimately useful sometimes. It did hallucinate a lot but I was still able to get some use out of it. I wouldn't count on it for most things however. It could answer simple questions and get it right mostly but never one or two levels deep. I clearly remember 4o was also a decent leap - the accuracy increased su…

The real leap was going from gpt-4 to sonnet 3.5. 4o was meh, o1 was barely better than sonnet and slow as hell in comparison.

The native voice mode of 4o is still interesting and not very deeply explored though imo. I'd love to build a Chinese teaching app that actual can critique tones etc but it isn't good enough for that.

Re: OpenAI Progress

#12

Post by beering »

shubhamjain wrote: post #8

Geez! When it comes to answering questions, GPT-5 almost always starts with glazing about what a great question it is, where as GPT-4 directly addresses the answer without the fluff. In a blind test, I would probably pick GPT-4 as a superior model, so I am not surprised why people feel so let down with GPT-5.

GPT-4 is very different from the latest GPT-4o in tone. Users are not asking for the direct no-fluff GPT-4. They want the GPT-4o that praises you for being brilliant, then claims it will be “brutally honest” before stating some mundane take.

Re: OpenAI Progress

#13

Post by throwawayk7h »

In 2033, for its 15th birthday, as a novelty, they'll train GPT1 specially for a chat interface just to let us talk to a pretend "ChatGPT 1" which never existed in the first place.

Re: OpenAI Progress

#15

Post by simianwords »

jascha_eng wrote: post #11
simianwords wrote: post #7

My interpretation of the progress. 3.5 to 4 was the most major leap. It went from being a party trick to legitimately useful sometimes. It did hallucinate a lot but I was still able to get some use out of it. I wouldn't count on it for most things however. It could answer simple questions and get it right mostly but never one or two levels deep. I clearly remember 4o was also a decent leap - the accuracy increased su…

The real leap was going from gpt-4 to sonnet 3.5. 4o was meh, o1 was barely better than sonnet and slow as hell in comparison. The native voice mode of 4o is still interesting and not very deeply explored though imo. I'd love to build a Chinese teaching app that actual can critique tones etc but it isn't good enough for that.

Its strange how Claude achieves similar performance without reasoning tokens.

Did you try advanced voice mode? Apparently it got a big upgrade during gpt 5 release - it may solve what you are looking for.

Re: OpenAI Progress

#17

Post by NitpickLawyer »

The answers were likely cherrypicked, but the 1/14 gpt5 answer is so damn good! There's no trace of that certainly - gptisms - in conclusion slop.

9/14 is equally impressive in actually "getting" what cursed means, and then doing it (as opposed to gpt4 outright refusing it).

13/14 is a show of how integrated tools can drive research, and "fix" the cutoff date problems of previous generations. Nothing new/revolutionary, but still cool to show it off.

The others are somewhere between ok and meh.

Re: OpenAI Progress

#18

Post by mathiaspoint »

nynx wrote: post #10

As usual, GPT-1 has the more beautiful and compelling answer.

I've noticed this too. The HRL seems to lock the models into one kind of personality (which is kind of the point of course.) They behave better but the raw GPTs can be much more creative.

Re: OpenAI Progress

#19

Post by raincole »

mmmore wrote: post #9
miller24 wrote: post #5

What's really interesting is that if you look at "Tell a story in 50 words about a toaster that becomes sentient" (10/14), the text-davinci-001 is much, much better than both GPT-4 and GPT-5.

I find GPT-5's story significantly better than text-davinci-001

I really wonder which one of us is the minority. Because I find text-davinci-001 answer is the only one that reads like a story. All the others don't even resemble my idea of "story" so to me they're 0/100.
Post reply on HN