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

271–280 of 336 posts

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#271

Post by wing-_-nuts »

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.

From what I've read, IQ is one of the more heritable traits, but only about 50% of one's intelligence is attributable to one's genes.

That means there are absolutely still massive benefits to be had in trying to ensure that kids grow up in safe, loving homes, with proper amounts of stimulation and enrichment, and are taught with a growth, not a fixed potential mindset.

Sad to say, but your own fixed mindset probably held you back from what you could truly achieve. You don't have to be Einstein to operate on the cutting edge of a field, I think most nobel prize winners have an iq of ~ 120

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#272

Post by wing-_-nuts »

tsss wrote: post #90
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

You don't need an educated workforce if you have machines that can do it reliably. The more important question is: who will buy your crap if your population is too poor due to lack of well paying jobs? A look towards England or Germany has the answer.

The top 10% of households already account for more than half of consumer spending in the US

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#273

Post by wing-_-nuts »

myrmidon wrote: post #259
onion2k wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how good a keyboard we might be able to invent it'll always be slower than a direct brain interface, and we have those, in a highly experimental way, now. One day we will look back at improvements to keyboards and touchscreens as the 'faster horse' of the physical interface era.

I'm not convinced, because all a keyboard really costs you is latency , while almost every human-machine interaction is actually bandwidth limited (by human output). Even getting zero latency from a perfect brain-machine interface would not make you meaningfully faster at most things I'd assume.

Yeah I noticed this as I became a faster typer. I very often find myself 'buffering' on choosing the right words / code more than I do on my typing speed.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#274

Post by bleepblap »

ragequittah wrote: post #213
ammbauer wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's done a lot of math for me that I couldn't have done on my own (without days of research), Isn't the point of doing the master's thesis that you do the math and research, so that you learn and understand the math and research?

I bet they were talking about how people didn't do long division when the calculator first came out too. Is using matlab and excel ok but AI not? Where do we draw the line with tools?

OP said they "generated entire chapters"

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#275

Post by MinimalAction »

user34283 wrote: post #198
MinimalAction wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For one, I can't even understand this part: Let me explain. My belief was that research as a task is non-trivial and would have been relatively out of reach for AI. Given the advances, that doesn't seem to be true. > And then there's the opinion that for some reason we should 'value' manual labor over using AI, which seems rather disagreeable. Could you explain why? I'm specifically talking about research. Of cours…

They way it was stated it appeared to me like "we should do research the heavy way even if the machine gives us the right answer", or that we should value research only if it was accomplished manually. I guess there are many ways to interpret the comment, with a lot of potential for disagreement.

My whole point was that we can't be sure the machine gives you right answer especially in research where much of it is uncharted territories.

There aren't many ways to interpret and I clarified what I meant. Thanks for participating, these comments are insufferable.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#276

Post by psychoslave »

visarga wrote: post #263
psychoslave wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://chat.mistral.ai/chat/8b529b3e-337f-42a4-bf36-34fd9e5 ... >Here’s a concise and thoughtful response you could use to engage with ako ’s last point: --- "The scale and speed might be the key difference here. While human-generated narratives—like religions or myths—emerged over centuries through collective belief, debate, and cultural evolution, LLMs enable individuals to produce vast, coherent-seeming narrative…

But people post on social networks, blogs, newspapers and other widely read places, while LLMs post in chat rooms with 1 reader most of their outputs.

No, the web is now full of this bot generated noise.

And even when only considering the tools used in isolated sessions not exposed by default, the most popular ones are tuned to favor engagement and retention over relevance. That's a different point as LLM definitely can be tuned in different direction, but in practice in does matter in terms of social impact at scale. Even prime time infotainment covered people falling in love or encouraged into suicidal loops by now. You're absolutely right is not always the best

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#277

Post by deadbabe »

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.

It is all those things. It consistently fails to make truly novel discoveries, everything it does is derived from something it trained on from somewhere.

No point in arguing about it though with true believers, they will never change their minds.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#278

Post by akavi »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #272
tsss wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need an educated workforce if you have machines that can do it reliably. The more important question is: who will buy your crap if your population is too poor due to lack of well paying jobs? A look towards England or Germany has the answer.

The top 10% of households already account for more than half of consumer spending in the US

Hmmm, that doesn't seem right. I'm having a hard time finding an actual consumption number, but I am confident it's well below 50%.

The top 10% of households by wage income do receive ~50% of pre-tax wage income, but:

1) our tax system is progressive, so actual net income share is less

2) there's significant post-wage redistribution (social security/medicaid)

3) that high income households consume a smaller percent of their net income is a well established fact.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#279

Post by boplicity »

GoatInGrey wrote: post #265
apwell23 wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Judging by the site, they don't have insightful answers to these questions. It's broken with weird artifacts, errors, and amateurish console printing in PROD. https://i.ibb.co/xSCtRnFJ/Screenshot-2025-11-25-084709.png https://i.ibb.co/7NTF7YPD/Screenshot-2025-11-25-084944.png

It also doesn't seem to work right now.

Re: Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3

#280

Post by k__ »

jaccola wrote: post #113
acters wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like hallucinations have changed over time from factual errors randomly shoehorned into the middle of sentences to the LLMs confidently telling you they are right and even provide their own reasoning to back up their claims, which most of the time are references that don't exist.

I've noticed the new OpenAI models do self contradiction a lot more than I've ever noticed before! Things like: - Aha, the error clearly lies in X, because ... so X is fine, the real error is in Y ... so Y is working perfectly. The smoking gun: Z ... - While you can do A, in practice it is almost never a good idea because ... which is why it's always best to do A

Yeah.

I worked with Grok 4.1 and it was awesome until it wasn't.

It told me to build something, just to tell me in the end that I could do it smaller and cheaper.

And that multiple times.

Best reply was the one that ended with something algong the lines of "I've built dozens of them!"

Post reply on HN