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

GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 766 posts

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#501

Post by vessenes »

minimaxir wrote: post #2

All the examples of "warmer" generations show that OpenAI's definition of warmer is synonymous with sycophantic , which is a surprise given all the criticism against that particular aspect of ChatGPT. I suspect this approach is a direct response to the backlash against removing 4o.

I'm sure it is. That said, they've also increased its steering responsiveness -- mine includes lots about not sucking up, so some testing is probably needed.

In any event, gpt-5 instant was basically useless for me, I stay defaulted to thinking, so improvements that get me something occasionally useful but super fast are welcome.

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#502

Post by arghwhat »

forgetfulness wrote: post #498
4b11b4 wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this top comment.. this isn't a question you ask an LLM. But I know, that's how people are using them and is the narrative which is sold to us...

You see people (business people who are enthusiastic about tech, often), claiming that these bots are the new Google and Wikipedia, and that you’re behind the times if you do, what amounts, to looking up information yourself. We’re preaching to the choir by being insistent here that you prompt these things to get a “vibe” about a topic rather than accurate information, but it bears repeating.

They are only the new Google when they are told to process and summarize web searches. When using trained knowledge they're about as reliable as a smart but stubborn uncle.

Pretty much only search-specific modes (perplexity, deep research toggles) do that right now...

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#503

Post by vessenes »

seunosewa wrote: post #236
logicprog wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I like Kimi K2/Thinking. IME it pushes back really, really hard on any kind of non obvious belief or statement, and it doesn't give up after a few turns — it just keeps going, iterating and refining and restating its points if you change your mind or taken on its criticisms. It's great for having a dialectic around something you've written, although somewhat unsatisfying because it'll never agree with you…

Which agent do you use it with?

I don't use it much, but I tried it out with okara.ai and loved their interface. No other connection to the company

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#504

Post by wickedsight »

minimaxir wrote: post #2

All the examples of "warmer" generations show that OpenAI's definition of warmer is synonymous with sycophantic , which is a surprise given all the criticism against that particular aspect of ChatGPT. I suspect this approach is a direct response to the backlash against removing 4o.

I'm starting to get this feeling that there's no way to satisfy everyone. Some people hate the sycophantic models, some love them. So whatever they do, there's a large group of people complaining.

Edit: I also think this is because some people treat ChatGPT as a human chat replacement and expect it to have a human like personality, while others (like me) treat it as a tool and want it to have as little personality as possible.

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#505

Post by adriand »

tarsinge wrote: post #492
adriand wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is unethical. Humans have consistently underestimated the subjective experience of other beings. You may have good reasons for believing these systems are currently incapable of anything approaching consciousness, but how will you know if or when the threshold has been crossed? Are you confident you will have ceased using an abusive tone by then? I don’t know if flies can experience pain. However, I’m no…

Consciousness and pain is not an emergent property of computation. This or all the other programs on your computer are already sentient, because it would be highly unlikely it’s specific sequences of instructions, like magic formulas, that creates consciousness. This source code? Draws a chart. This one? Makes the computer feel pain.

Many leading scientists in artificial intelligence do in fact believe that consciousness is an emergent property of computation. In fact, startling emergent properties are exactly what drives the current huge wave of research and investment. In 2010, if you said, “image recognition is not an emergent property of computation”, you would have been proved wrong in just a couple of years.

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#506

Post by vessenes »

mips_avatar wrote: post #269

I wish chatgpt would stop saying things like "here's a no nonsense answer" like maybe just don't include nonsense in the answer?

Yes, I had total PTSD reading that in the announcement. Whether it's just evolving a tone so that we don't get fatigue or actually improving, I'm happy we're moving on. My audio (still 4o I believe) interactions are maddening - somehow it's remembered I want a quick answer, so EVERY.SINGLE.ANSWER starts with "Okay, let's keep this snappy and info dense." Srsly. Wiping instructions / memory reset seems to have no effect, it comes back almost immediately.

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#508

Post by saaaaaam »

0xdeafbeef wrote: post #472
pbalau wrote: post #427

> what romanian football player won the premier league > The only Romanian football player to have won the English Premier League (as of 2025) is Florin Andone, but wait — actually, that’s incorrect; he never won the league. > ... > No Romanian footballer has ever won the Premier League (as of 2025). Yes, this is what we needed, more "conversational" ChatGPT... Let alone the fact the answer is wrong.

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6915c8bd1c80819183a54cd144b55eb2 Damn this is a lot of self correcting

That's complete garbage.

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#509

Post by kenjackson »

xmcqdpt2 wrote: post #499
Quarrel wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My worry is that they're training it on Q&A from the general public now, and that this tone, and more specifically, how obsequious it can be, is exactly what the general public want. Most of the time, I suspect, people are using it like wikipedia, but with a shortcut to cut through to the real question they want answered; and unfortunately they don't know if it is right or wrong, they just want to be told how bright…

LLMs only really make sense for tasks where verifying the solution (which you have to do!) is significantly easier than solving the problem: translation where you know the target and source languages, agentic coding with automated tests, some forms of drafting or copy editing, etc. General search is not one of those! Sure, the machine can give you its sources but it won't tell you about sources it ignored. And verify…

Don’t search engines have the same problem? You don’t get back a list of sites that the engine didn’t prefer for some reason.

Re: GPT-5.1: A smarter, more conversational ChatGPT

#510

Post by wickedsight »

falcor84 wrote: post #230
thewebguyd wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. I want to be conversational with my computer, I don't want it to respond in a manner that's trying to continue the conversation. Q: "Hey Computer, make me a cup of tea" A: "Ok. Making tea." Not: Q: "Hey computer, make me a cup of tea" A: "Oh wow, what a fantastic idea, I love tea don't you? I'll get right on that cup of tea for you. Do you want me to tell you about all the different ways you can make and enjoy…

I'm generally ok with it wanting a conversation, but yes, I absolutely hate it that is seems to always finish with a question even when it makes zero sense.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was a feature to drive engagement.
Post reply on HN