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

241–250 of 336 posts

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#241

Post by jchallis »

amunozo wrote: post #235
Culonavirus wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The computer science field is going to be an absolute shitshow within 5 years (it already kinda is). On one side you'll have ADHD dog attention span zoomers trying out all these nth party model apis and tools every 5 seconds (switching them like socks, insisting the latest one is better, but ultimately producing the same slop) and on the other side you'll have all these applied math gurus squeezing out the last bits…

It's been three years of amazing use cases and discoveries, and in those same years we got things like Ozempic. You can be skeptical of all the hyped things that are said that may be exaggerated without negating the good side.

The patent for Ozempic was filed nearly 20 years ago: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8129343B2/en?oq=US812934...

Ozempic’s FDA approval was in 2017, the same year transformers were invented.

Whatever you can place at LLMs, GLP-1’s aren’t one of them.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#242

Post by darkwater »

ako wrote: post #221
psychoslave wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some major differences though. Without using these tools, individual are pretty limited in how much bullshit they can output for many reasons, including they are not mere digital puppet without need to survive in society. It’s clear pro-slavery-minded elitists are happy to sell the speech that people should become "good complement to AI", that is even more disposable as this puppets. But unlike this mindles…

Humans can output serious amounts of unproven bullshit, e.g., 3000 incompatible gods and all the religions that come with them...

How many individuals were involved and over how many years?

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#243

Post by notachatbot123 »

mirekrusin wrote: post #171
Madmallard wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really any different in my experience

Stochastic parrot? Autocomplete on steroids? Fancy autocorrect? Bullshit generator? AI snake oil? Statistical mimicry? You don't hear that anymore. Feels like whole generation of skeptics evaporated.

Maybe your bubble flew away from those voices? I see them all the time, and am glad.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#244

Post by ako »

darkwater wrote: post #242
ako wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans can output serious amounts of unproven bullshit, e.g., 3000 incompatible gods and all the religions that come with them...

How many individuals were involved and over how many years?

Why does it matter? If you consider not just the people creating these hallucination, but also the people accepting them and using them, it must be billions and billions...

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#245

Post by Herring »

brightball wrote: post #154
krainboltgreene wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so hilarious to look at 10k years of education history and be like "Nah, funding doesn't make a difference." Incredible.

The US already spends more per student than almost any other country (5th globally) and the outcomes are getting constantly worse. It’s not a funding problem.

That's half true. You have to think about cost of living, you can't just compare across the globe like that. And especially opportunity cost. In the US, teacher pay lags behind similarly educated professionals.

But you're right after a certain point other factors matter more than simple $ per student. Unfortunately one of those factors is teacher pay teacher quality.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#246

Post by iLoveOncall »

simonw wrote: post #54
iLoveOncall wrote: post #16

[flagged]

LLMs have hit the wall since ChatGPT came out in 2022?

Yes?

Run the same prompt on old models and the current "SOTA" and you'll get pretty much the same answer word for word.

People think models have improved because tooling around the models (Claude Code, Cline, or your other favorite LLM wrapper) has improved, not because the models themselves have made any kind of leap.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#247

Post by bradly »

matwood wrote: post #214
ManlyBread wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like clockwork. Each time someone criticizes any aspect of any LLM there's always someone to tell that person they're using the LLM wrong. Perhaps it's time to stop blaming the user?

You wouldn't use a screwdriver to hammer a nail. Understanding how to use a tool is part of using the tool. It's early days and how to make the best use of these tools is still being discovered. Fortunately a lot of people are experimenting on what works best, so it only takes a little bit of reading to get more consistent results.

What if the company selling the screwdriver kept telling you your could use it as a hammer? What if you were being bombarded with marketing the hammers are being replaced by screwdrivers?

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#248

Post by [deleted] »

psychoslave wrote: post #236
Madmallard wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean is it really that interesting if it completely falls flat and permanently runs in unfulfilling circles around basically any mild complexity the problem introduces as you get further along solving it, making it really hard to not feel like you need to just do it yourself?

I would say yes, it’s an interesting tool. For one thing, it’s far more interesting than a rubber duck in many cases. Of course on that matter in the end it’s about framing the representation adequately and enter a fictional dialog.

[deleted]

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#249

Post by apwell23 »

stavros wrote: post #50
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…

It's gotten more and more shippable, especially with the latest generation (Codex 5.1, Sonnet 4.5, now Opus 4.5). My metric is "wtfs per line", and it's been decreasing rapidly. My current preference is Codex 5.1 (Sonnet 4.5 as a close second, though it got really dumb today for "some reason"). It's been good to the point where I shipped multiple projects with it without a problem (with eg https://pine.town being one…

> https://pine.town

how many prompts did it take you to make this?

how did you make sure that each new prompt didn't break some previous functionality?

did you have a precise vision for it when you started or did you just go with whatever was being given to you?

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#250

Post by darkwater »

ako wrote: post #244
darkwater wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many individuals were involved and over how many years?

Why does it matter? If you consider not just the people creating these hallucination, but also the people accepting them and using them, it must be billions and billions...

and that's the point. You need a critical mass of people buying into something. With LLMs, you just need ONE person with ONE model and a modest enough hardware.
Post reply on HN