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

GPT‑5.3 Instant

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 330 posts

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#311

Post by xingped »

zachallaun wrote: post #224
kenjackson wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most frustrating part for me is that this is how I used to write. I was always doing, "Why X works, but Y doesn't" and stuff like that. I may have seemed trite or pompous (or both) in the past, but now it seems like I'm copying an LLM -- which actually feels worse. One thing I haven't seen ChatGPT do much of is use sound-effects, so swoosh here we go with my new writing style schwing !

I feel you. I've been using en-dash in my writing for decades, but finding myself removing them now for fear of being mistaken for an LLM. (They tend to use em-dash, but I don't think people are going to distinguish between – and —.)

I think people do - it's one of the main ways you can reliably spot AI-generated content. M-dashes are so fat they stick out like a sore thumb.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#312

Post by dbbk »

dmix wrote: post #116

> GPT‑5.3 Instant also improves the quality of answers when information comes from the web. It more effectively balances what it finds online with its own knowledge and reasoning This is definitely something I've noticed GPT does much better than Claude in general. Claude preferences trying to answer everything itself without searching.

Anecdotal of course but I've found Gemini best when it comes to web searching, I guess because they built their own AI index

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#313

Post by jnovek »

MetalSnake wrote: post #309
smusamashah wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This could be the reason https://petergpt.github.io/bullshit-benchmark/viewer/index.v... Claude bullshits the least of all models. ChatGPT does it more than half the time.

I'm surprised that Opus 4.5 is better than Opus 4.6 and Sonnet 4.6 is even better than Opus 4.5 (and 4.6). Shouldn't Opus 4.6 be the best of the Claude models?

I can’t really tell the difference between the two models for the things I do any more.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#314

Post by ern_ave »

hereonout2 wrote: post #42
ern_ave wrote: post #32

Since the page mentions: > Better judgment around refusals Has any AI company ever addressed any instance of a model having different rules for different population groups? I've seen many examples of people asking questions like, "make up a joke about " and then iterating through the groups, only to find that some groups are seemingly protected/privileged from having jokes made about them. Has any AI company ever add…

> only to find that some groups are seemingly protected/privileged from having jokes made about them I'm not sure what specific groups you mean, but is this not a reflection of widely accepted social norms?

> I'm not sure what specific groups you mean

The specifics are irrelevant. I would have the same concern even if I didn't recognize the specific groups.

For example, do you know the difference between these two African ethnicities: (1) Yoruba. (2) Shona.

No? Well, me neither. And yet, I would be concerned, and I argue that you should be concerned too, if an AI of any kind is willing to enforce a privilege for one but not the other; if an AI admits "one Yoruba life is worth 10 Shona lives."

That's not what I want an AI to do. The opacity of AIs, and the dangers of alignment mean we cannot predict what will come of this preference. Do you not see how dangerous this is?

> but is this not a reflection of widely accepted social norms?

Are you making an is-ought argument here?? Are you really saying, "this isn't a big deal because society does it too"

That strikes me as incredibly shortsighted and dangerous. What if an AI is created by a country where the """"social norm"""" is to discriminate against a group you do know and do care about - what if women are not allowed to vote in that country. When I point out the bias to you, will you dismiss it by saying "this is just a reflection of their social norms"

I doubt it. I think you'll say "this is wrong."

Why can't you say that here, even without knowing the specific groups?

Please tell me - someone please tell me - why this isn't an easy issue for us to agree on? Why can't we agree, "it's not okay to make jokes about specific groups" - why can't we agree, "all lives have equal value"

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#315

Post by [deleted] »

gammarator wrote: post #111
SgtBastard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Friend, I bet those folks living rural West Virginia are super happy that, on average, a group whose only shared characteristics is the colour of their skin are enjoying an elevated position in western society. Super happy. All racism is gross.

Ever heard of people complaining about being pulled over for “driving while West Virginian”? Why or why not?

[deleted]

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#316

Post by sejje »

vel0city wrote: post #104
idiotsecant wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's socially acceptable to make white people jokes because white people on average enjoy an elevated position in western society. It's viewed as 'punching up'. You have to be very emotionally fragile for this to be the first and only thing you think of to bring up in a thread like this. It's also supremely uninteresting cable news talking point slop.

> It's viewed as 'punching up' Shouldn't we be building systems that don't punch anyone in racist ways? Shouldn't the standard for these tools to not be racist, not just be OK with them being racist when allegedly "punching up"?

Imagine this obviously noble idea getting downvoted.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#317

Post by marssaxman »

jpgreenall wrote: post #34

Is nobody else unsettled by the example? Strange timing to talk about calculating trajectories on long range projectiles?

What better example would you suggest for a demonstration of an actually-harmless question which sits close enough to the guardrails that the previous model would have stuttered over it?

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#318

Post by benterix »

chrisss395 wrote: post #251
zachallaun wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you. I've been using en-dash in my writing for decades, but finding myself removing them now for fear of being mistaken for an LLM. (They tend to use em-dash, but I don't think people are going to distinguish between – and —.)

Do you think pre-AI writing is going to become really valuable because it is free of any AI assistance? If we all start using AI to assist in writing, then pre-AI writing may become important, similar to pre-atomic steel (i.e., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel )

It's already important, for various reasons. E.g. I love older electronics books where they explain things in a very thorough manner (maybe because they had more time?). But of course reading older books is full of traps, in some subjects you need to be more careful than when analyzing the output of an LLM.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#319

Post by marssaxman »

sumeno wrote: post #147
BeetleB wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When primed, people will see things that aren't there.

and it's someone's job to think of that connection before publishing the release and they failed

The connection is a ghostly wisp, archery not having been relevant to warfare since the late 19th century.
Post reply on HN