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

ChatGPT Pulse

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 766 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#151

Post by jama211 »

dakiol wrote: post #107
SirensOfTitan wrote: post #27

My pulse today is just a mediocre rehash of prior conversations I’ve had on the platform. I tried to ask GPT-5 pro the other day to just pick an ambitious project it wanted to work on, and I’d carry out whatever physical world tasks it needed me to, and all it did was just come up with project plans which were rehashes of my prior projects framed as its own. I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools. It feels…

> I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools Same. It reminds me the 1984 event in which the computer itself famously “spoke” to the audience using its text-to-speech feature. Pretty amazing at that time, but nevertheless quite useless since then

Text to speech has been an incredible breakthrough for many with vision, visual processing, or speech disabilities. You take that back.

Stephen Hawking without text to speech would’ve been mute.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#152

Post by furyofantares »

dlojudice wrote: post #32

I see some pessimism in the comments here but honestly, this kind of product is something that would make me pay for ChatGPT again (I already pay for Claude, Gemini, Cursor, Perplexity, etc.). At the risk of lock-in, a truly useful assistant is something I welcome, and I even find it strange that it didn't appear sooner.

I doubt there would be this level of pessimism if people thought this is a progress toward a truly useful assistant.

Personally it sounds negative value. Maybe a startup that's not doing anything else could iterate on something like this into a killer app, but my expectation that OpenAI can do so is very, very low.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#153

Post by measurablefunc »

jhickok wrote: post #135
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At best, it has probabilistic biases. OpenAI had to train newer models to not favor the name "Lily." They have to do this manually for every single particular bias that the models generate that is noticed by the public. I'm sure there are many such biases that aren't important to train out of responses, but exist in latent space.

>At best, it has probabilistic biases. What do you think humans have?

Genetic drives & biological imperatives.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#154

Post by jama211 »

xwowsersx wrote: post #13

Google's edge obvious here is the deep integration it already has with calendar, apps, and chats and what not that lets them surface context-rich updates naturally. OpenAI doesn't have that same ecosystem lock-in yet, so to really compete they'll need to get more into those integrations. I think what it comes down to ultimately is that being "just a model" company isn't going to work. Intelligence itself will go to z…

I have Gmail and Google calendar etc but haven’t seen any AI features pop up that would be useful to me, am I living under a rock or is Google not capitalising on this advantage properly?

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#155

Post by kamranjon »

throwuxiytayq wrote: post #97
kamranjon wrote: post #86

Can this be interpreted as anything other than a scheme to charge you for hidden token fees? It sounds like they're asking users to just hand over a blank check to OpenAI to let it use as many tokens as it sees fit? "ChatGPT can now do asynchronous research on your behalf. Each night, it synthesizes information from your memory, chat history, and direct feedback to learn what’s most relevant to you, then delivers per…

No, it isn’t. It makes no sense and I can’t believe you would think this is a strategy they’re pursuing. This is a Pro/Plus account feature, so the users don’t pay anything extra, and they’re planning to make this free for everyone. I very much doubt this feature would generate a lot of traffic anyway - it’s basically one more message to process per day. OpenAI clearly recently focuses on model cost effectiveness, wi…

If you think that inference at OpenAI is nearly free, then I got a bridge to sell you. Seriously though this is not speculation, if you look at the recent interview with Altman he pretty explicitly states that they underestimated that inference costs would dwarf training costs - and he also stated that the one thing that could bring this house of cards down is if users decide they don’t actually want to pay for these services, and so far, they certainly have not covered costs.

I admit that I didn’t understand the Pro plan feature (I mostly use the API and assumed a similar model) but I think if you assume that this feature will remain free or that its costs won’t be incurred elsewhere, you’re likely ignoring the massive buildouts of data centers to support inference that is happening across the US right now.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#156

Post by rchaud »

creata wrote: post #96
neom wrote: post #5

Just connect everything folks, we'll proactively read everything, all the time, and you'll be a 10x human, trust us friends, just connect everything...

I might be projecting, but I think most users of ChatGPT are less interested in "being a 10x human", and more interested in having a facsimile of human connection without any of the attendant vulnerability.

...or don't want to pay for Cliff's Notes.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#157

Post by sequoia »

Here's a free product enhancement for OpenAI if they're not already doing this:

A todo app that reminds you of stuff. say "here's the stuff I need to do, dishes, clean cat litter fold laundry and put it away, move stuff to dryer then fold that when it's done etc." then it asks about how long these things take or gives you estimates. Then (here's the feature) it checks in with you at intervals: "hey it's been 30 minutes, how's it going with the dishes?"

This is basically "executive function coach." Or you could call it NagBot. Either way this would be extremely useful, and it's mostly just timers & push notifications.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#158

Post by dalmo3 »

The one modern thing that didn't have a feed, and (in the best case) just did what you asked.

Next week: ChatGPT Reels.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#159

Post by singron »

logicprog wrote: post #90
jsheard wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My personal productivity has skyrocketed in the last 12 months. Has your productivity objectively, measurably improved or does it just feel like it has improved? Recall the METR study which caught programmers self-reporting they were 20% faster with AI when they were actually 20% slower.

The design of that study is pretty bad, and as a result it doesn't end up actually showing what it claims to show / what people claim it does. https://www.fightforthehuman.com/are-developers-slowed-down-...

I don't think there is anything factually wrong with this criticism, but it largely rehashes caveats that are already well explored in the original paper, which goes through unusual lengths to clearly explain many ways the study is flawed.

The study gets so much attention since it's one of the few studies on the topic with this level of rigor on real-world scenarios, and it explains why previous studies or anecdotes may have claimed perceived increases in productivity even if there wasn't any actual increases. It clearly sets a standard that we can't just ask people if they felt more productive (or they need to feel massively more productive to clearly overcome this bias).

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#160

Post by rchaud »

labrador wrote: post #138
ducttape12 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't about doing "serious" work, it's about making ChatGPT the first thing you interact with in the day (and hopefully something you'll keep coming back to)

I don't wake up and start talking to my phone. I make myself breakfast/coffee and sit down in front of my window on the world and start exploring it. I like the old internet, not the curated walled gardens of phone apps.

Plenty of people open Reels or Tiktok the second they wake up. Mobile means notifications, and of you see one as soon as you turn off the alarm, you're more likely to open the app.
Post reply on HN