121–130 of 433 posts
I still don’t know how openAI thought it was a good idea to have a model named "4o" AND a model named "o4", unless the goal was intentional confusion
Even ChatGPT (and certainly Google) confuses the names. I'm sure there is some internal/academic reason for them, but from an outside observer simply horrible.
We're the technical crowd cursed and blinded by knowledge.
5.2 is back to being a sycophantic hallucinating mess for most use cases - I've anecdotally caught it out on many of the sessions I've had where it apologizes "You're absolutely right... that used to be the case but as of the latest version as you pointed out, it no longer is." when it never existed in the first place. It's just not good. On the other hand - 5.0-nano has been great for fast (and cheap) quick requests…
Even if I submit the documentation or reference links they are completely ignored.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your work exploits people's addictive propensity and behaviours, and gives corporations incentives and tools to build on that. Insane spin you're putting on it. At best, you're a cog in one of the worst recent evolutions of capitalism.
Advertising is not a recent evolution of capitalism, it's a foundational piece of it. Whatever you do as a job would not exist if there was no one marketing it. This hostility seems insane.
Messages of that sophistication are always dangerous, and modern advertising is the most widespread example of it.
The hostility is more than justified, I can only hope the whole industry is regulated downwards, even if whatever company I work for sells less.
Would be cool if they'd release the weights for these models so users could now use them locally.
Why would someone want to spend half a million dollars on GPUs and components (if not more) to run one year old models that genuinely aren't useful? You can't self host trillion parameter models unless you own a datacenter lol (or want to just light money on fire).
> We’re continuing to make progress toward a version of ChatGPT designed for adults over 18, grounded in the principle of treating adults like adults, and expanding user choice and freedom within appropriate safeguards. To support this, we’ve rolled out age prediction for users under 18 in most markets. https://help.openai.com/en/articles/12652064-age-prediction-... interesting
Sexual and intimate chat with LLMs will be a huge market for whoever corners it. They'd be crazy to leave that money on the table.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your work exploits people's addictive propensity and behaviours, and gives corporations incentives and tools to build on that. Insane spin you're putting on it. At best, you're a cog in one of the worst recent evolutions of capitalism.
Advertising is not a recent evolution of capitalism, it's a foundational piece of it. Whatever you do as a job would not exist if there was no one marketing it. This hostility seems insane.
> We’re continuing to make progress toward a version of ChatGPT designed for adults over 18, grounded in the principle of treating adults like adults, and expanding user choice and freedom within appropriate safeguards. To support this, we’ve rolled out age prediction for users under 18 in most markets. https://help.openai.com/en/articles/12652064-age-prediction-... interesting
What’s the goal there? Sexting? I’m guessing age is needed to serve certain ads and the like, but what’s the value for customers?
ChatGPT 5.2 has been a good motivator for me to try out other LLMs because of how bad it is. Both 5.1 and 5.2 have been downgrades in terms of instruction following and accuracy, but 5.2 especially so. The upside is that that's had me using Claude much more, and I like a lot of things about it, both in terms of UI and the answers. It's also gotten me more serious about running local models. So, thank you OpenAI, for…