As a current graduate student, I have seen similar comments in academia. My colleagues agree that a conversation with these recent models feels like chatting with an expert in their subfields. I don't know if it represents research as a field would not be immune to advances in AI tech. I still hope this world values natural intelligence and having the drive to do things heavily than a robot brute-forcing into saying "right" things.
Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
11–20 of 336 posts
Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#12From my experience we just get both. The constant risk of some catastrophic hallucination buried in the output, in addition to more subtle, and pervasive, concerns. I haven't tried with Gemini 3 but when I prompted Claude to write a 20 page short story it couldn't even keep basic chronology and characters straight. I wonder if the 14 page research paper would stand up to scrutiny.
Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#13> But it suggests that “human in the loop” is evolving from “human who fixes AI mistakes” to “human who directs AI work.” And that may be the biggest change since the release of ChatGPT. I feel like I've been hearing this for at least 1.5 years at this point (since the launch of GPT 4/Claude 3). I certainly agree we've been heading in this direction but when will this become unambiguously true rather than a phrase pe…
Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#14> But it suggests that “human in the loop” is evolving from “human who fixes AI mistakes” to “human who directs AI work.” And that may be the biggest change since the release of ChatGPT. I feel like I've been hearing this for at least 1.5 years at this point (since the launch of GPT 4/Claude 3). I certainly agree we've been heading in this direction but when will this become unambiguously true rather than a phrase pe…
there will always be "mistakes" even if the AI is so good that the only mistakes are the ones caused by your prompts not being specific enough. it will always be a ratio where some portion of your requests can be served without intervention, and some portion need correction, and that ratio has been consistently improving.
Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#15It is interesting that most of our modes of interaction with AI is still just textboxes. The only big UX change in that the last three years has been the introduction of the Claude Code / OpenAI Codex tools. They feel amazing to use, like you're working with another independent mind. I am curious what the user interfaces of AI in the future will be, I think whoever can crack that will create immense value.
ChatGPT's voice is absolutely amazing and I prefer it to text for brainstorming.
Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#16Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#17It is interesting that most of our modes of interaction with AI is still just textboxes. The only big UX change in that the last three years has been the introduction of the Claude Code / OpenAI Codex tools. They feel amazing to use, like you're working with another independent mind. I am curious what the user interfaces of AI in the future will be, I think whoever can crack that will create immense value.
Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#18Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#19Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
#20> Again, we have moved past hallucinations and errors to more subtle, and often human-like, concerns. From my experience we just get both. The constant risk of some catastrophic hallucination buried in the output, in addition to more subtle, and pervasive, concerns. I haven't tried with Gemini 3 but when I prompted Claude to write a 20 page short story it couldn't even keep basic chronology and characters straight. I…