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

Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

oneusefulthing.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 336 posts

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#91

Post by Lerc »

mynameisjody wrote: post #43

Every time I see an article like this, it's always missing --- but is it any good, is it correct? They always show you the part that is impressive - "it walked the tricky tightrope of figuring out what might be an interesting topic and how to execute it with the data it had - one of the hardest things to teach." Then it goes on, "After a couple of vague commands (“build it out more, make it better”) I got a 14 page p…

I guess you have a couple of options.

You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field. You can hit personal ideologies or outliers, but asking several people seems to find a degree of consensus.

You could try varying tasks that perform complex things that result in easy to test things.

When I started trying chatbots for coding, one of my test prompts was

    Create a JavaScript function edgeDetect(image) that takes an ImageData object and returns a new ImageData object with all direction Sobel edge detection.
That was about the level where some models would succeed and some will fail.

Recently I found

    Can you create a webgl glow blur shader that takes a 2d canvas as a texture and renders it onscreen with webgl boosting the brightness so that #ffffff is extremely bright white and glowing,
Produced a nice demo with slider for parameters, a few refinements (hierarchical scaling version) and I got it to produce the same interface as a module that I had written myself and it worked as a drop in replacement.

These things are fairly easy to check because if it is performant and visually correct then it's about good enough to go.

It's also worth noting that as they attempt more and more ambitious tasks, they are quite probably testing around the limit of capability. There is both marketing and science in this area. When they say they can do X, it might not mean it can do it every time, but it has done it at least once.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#92

Post by meindnoch »

cgh wrote: post #71
mynameisjody wrote: post #43

Every time I see an article like this, it's always missing --- but is it any good, is it correct? They always show you the part that is impressive - "it walked the tricky tightrope of figuring out what might be an interesting topic and how to execute it with the data it had - one of the hardest things to teach." Then it goes on, "After a couple of vague commands (“build it out more, make it better”) I got a 14 page p…

This is a variation of the Gell-Mann amnesia effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

One could say, the GeLLMann amnesia effect. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#93

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

oblio wrote: post #32
timschmidt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unix CLI utilities have been all text for 50 years. Arguably that is why they are still relevant. Attempts to impose structured data on the paradigm like those in PowerShell have their adherents and can be powerful, but fail when the data doesn't fit the structure. We see similar tendency toward the most general interfaces in "operator mode" and similar the-AI-uses-the-mouse-and-keyboard schemes. It's entirely possib…

Yet the most popular platforms on the planet have people pointing a finger (or several) at a picture. And the most popular media format on the planet is and will be (for the foreseeable future), video. Video is only limited by our capacity to produce enough of it at a decent quality, otherwise humanity is definitely not looking back fondly at BBSes and internet forums (and I say this as someone who loves forums). Gen…

WhatsApp is primarily a text-based chat interface and it has pretty much universal adoption in the countries where it's popular.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#94

Post by christophilus »

randyrand wrote: post #39

For Caude Code, Antigrav, etc, do people really just let an LLM loose on their own personal system? I feel like these should run in a cloud enviroment, or at least on some specific machine where I don't care what it does.

I only ever run it in a podman developer container.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#95

Post by taurath »

Lerc wrote: post #91
mynameisjody wrote: post #43

Every time I see an article like this, it's always missing --- but is it any good, is it correct? They always show you the part that is impressive - "it walked the tricky tightrope of figuring out what might be an interesting topic and how to execute it with the data it had - one of the hardest things to teach." Then it goes on, "After a couple of vague commands (“build it out more, make it better”) I got a 14 page p…

I guess you have a couple of options. You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field. You can hit personal ideologies or outliers, but asking several people seems to find a degree of consensus. You could try varying tasks that perform complex things that result in easy to test things. When I started trying chatbots for coding, one of my test prompts was Create a JavaScript function edgeDetect(image) that…

> You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field

That’s the problem - the experts all promise stuff that can’t be easily replicated. The promises the experts send doesn’t match the model. The same request might succeed and might fail, and might fail in such a way that subsequent prompts might recover or might not.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#96

Post by taurath »

daedrdev wrote: post #73
lm28469 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember 54% of US adults read at or below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level. The sane conclusion would be to invest in education, not to dump hundreds of billions of llms, but ok

Education is not just a funding issues. Policy choices, like making it impossible for students to fail which means they have no incentive to learn anything, can be more impactful.

But holy shit is it also a funding issue when teachers make nothing.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#97

Post by Lerc »

taurath wrote: post #95
Lerc wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you have a couple of options. You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field. You can hit personal ideologies or outliers, but asking several people seems to find a degree of consensus. You could try varying tasks that perform complex things that result in easy to test things. When I started trying chatbots for coding, one of my test prompts was Create a JavaScript function edgeDetect(image) that…

> You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field That’s the problem - the experts all promise stuff that can’t be easily replicated. The promises the experts send doesn’t match the model. The same request might succeed and might fail, and might fail in such a way that subsequent prompts might recover or might not.

The experts I am talking about trusting here are the ones doing the replication, not the ones making the claims.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#98

Post by user34283 »

MinimalAction wrote: post #47
MinimalAction wrote: post #11

> So is this a PhD-level intelligence? In some ways, yes, if you define a PhD level intelligence as doing the work of a competent grad student at a research university. But it also had some of the weaknesses of a grad student. 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.…

HN tends to be very weird around the topic of AI. No idea why opinions like this are downvoted without having to offer any criticism.

For one, I can't even understand this part:

> I don't know if it represents research as a field would not be immune to advances in AI tech

And then there's the opinion that for some reason we should 'value' manual labor over using AI, which seems rather disagreeable.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#99

Post by timschmidt »

taurath wrote: post #95
Lerc wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you have a couple of options. You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field. You can hit personal ideologies or outliers, but asking several people seems to find a degree of consensus. You could try varying tasks that perform complex things that result in easy to test things. When I started trying chatbots for coding, one of my test prompts was Create a JavaScript function edgeDetect(image) that…

> You could trust the expert analysis of people in that field That’s the problem - the experts all promise stuff that can’t be easily replicated. The promises the experts send doesn’t match the model. The same request might succeed and might fail, and might fail in such a way that subsequent prompts might recover or might not.

That's how working with junior team members or open source project contributors goes too. Perhaps that's the big disconnect. Reviewing and integrating LLM contributions slotted right into my existing workflow on my open source projects. Not all of them work. They often need fixing, stylistic adjustments, or tweaking to fit a larger architectural goal. That is the norm for all contributions in my experience. So the LLM is just a very fast, very responsive contributor to me. I don't expect it to get things right the first time.

But it seems lots of folks do.

Nevertheless, style, tweaks, and adjustments are a lot less work than banging out a thousand lines of code by hand. And whether an LLM or a person on the other side of the world did it, I'd still have to review it. So I'm happy to take increasingly common and increasingly sophisticated wins.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#100

Post by Herring »

jlawson wrote: post #82
lm28469 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember 54% of US adults read at or below the equivalent of a sixth-grade level. The sane conclusion would be to invest in education, not to dump hundreds of billions of llms, but ok

Unfortunately, people are born with a certain intellectual capacity and can't be improved beyond that with any amount of training or education. We're largely hitting peoples' capacities already. We can't educate someone with 80 IQ to be you; we can't educate you (or I) into being Einstein. The same way we can't just train anyone to be an amazing basketball player.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Modern society benefits a lot from specialization. It's like the dumbest kid in France is still better at French than you.

Post reply on HN