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

GPT‑Live

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 556 posts

Re: GPT‑Live

#211

Post by z7 »

Fraterkes wrote: post #134
athyuttamre wrote: post #28

(Atty from OpenAI here) GPT-Live-1 is the first version of a new generation of models, and we believe the full-duplex architecture + delegation enables entirely new ways of human-AI interaction. Would love to hear your feedback!

Hey! Bit of an unusual question maybe: if this stuff further exarcerbates the loneliness epidemic and atomization of society, will you be able to live with yourself you think? If you hear about teenagers only spending time with your chatbot in 5 years, will you feel some amount of personal responsibility or not? Always curious to hear you guys' perspective on that kind of stuff!

"Hey Leibniz, how do you live with yourself knowing that your binary system helped eventually replace human conversations?"

Re: GPT‑Live

#212

Post by tough »

amarant wrote: post #170
scottyah wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you compared it to grok in teslas?

Wait, you can talk to Teslas now? How did I miss thiS? Can I get a red led bar and basically have a KITT?

the cybertruck seems designed for this KITT fantasy of yours

Re: GPT‑Live

#213

Post by purpleidea »

100ms wrote: post #146
Someone1234 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too found this with their previous attempts. I have my Chat personality settings stripped right down to no-fluff. I'd want voice to be more akin to the Star Trek computer, and less akin to as you said an AI friend, but previously it was tuned too personable/friend-like.

Star Trek computer voice model is something I have yet to encounter, and I've looked repeatedly :) It's not about a specific voice, it's the fact they managed to capture "I am a utility" perfectly in the voice. Our modern friends do not want to be thought of as a utility, but to engender trust and agency all of their own and that's a huge problem for me.

For many years, I've wanted ED-209 (robocop) voice from something like espeak or similar. Still can't find anything good.

Not for chat, just as a way to make notification messages that sound like ED-209.

Re: GPT‑Live

#214

Post by mlsu »

perching_aix wrote: post #145
mlsu wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, every minute you spend texting or talking to a chatbot is a minute that you'd have spent talking to another human beings. Literally the only important thing in life, the basis of all value, the formation of self-identity, comes from communication with other human beings.

> every minute you spend texting or talking to a chatbot is a minute that you'd have spent talking to another human beings Very blatantly and obviously not though???

The extent to which it's true is the extent of the evilness of the technology. Go search the phrase "ai boyfriend" on reddit sometime; imagine what it will be like when society is fully baked with this shit. You're talking to AIs all day at work. You're talking to AI's when you use social media. You're talking to AIs for therapy. You're talking to AIs on dating apps.

If your answer is "well I'll simply touch grass" I agree. But most people won't which is why this is tech is immiserating and, I would argue, evil.

Re: GPT‑Live

#215

Post by ryandvm »

zkmon wrote: post #97
jonstaab wrote: post #76

This is the opposite direction AI should be going. Human relationships are the most valuable thing we have, and so, naturally, technology seeks to intermediate and now replace them. I'm not Catholic, but this podcast presents a very interesting argument against talking to AI as if they were human: https://newpolity.com/podcasts-hub/debate-chatbots

Most of what AI does is already in wrong direction. Not just human-to-human interaction, it took away thinking, creative work, sensory perception (glasses) and responses. People call it as helping humans, but I call it as sucking away the "human-ness" from humans. After the damage is done, the mega corps would simply shrug and will say "Well, we were just responding to our business competition" The business knows no…

> "Well, we were just responding to our business competition" The business knows no humanness, because it is not a human.

Yup. Except, by God, we ought to make sure the business has unlimited free speech (i.e. campaign contributions).

Re: GPT‑Live

#216

Post by znpy »

athyuttamre wrote: post #28

(Atty from OpenAI here) GPT-Live-1 is the first version of a new generation of models, and we believe the full-duplex architecture + delegation enables entirely new ways of human-AI interaction. Would love to hear your feedback!

> Would love to hear your feedback!

I'm currently on the 20 $/mo subscription and using codex meaningfully, and i'm loving this.

I am considering bumping my subscription to the 100 $/month and this might be the reason i switch, BUT: i really envision me using this also through other means as well (eg: agents like openclaw/hermes) in agentic ways.

Will this be supported?

I can make OpenAI stuff the center of my agentic AI life, but I need it to be interoperable.

Re: GPT‑Live

#217

Post by jmarcher »

progval wrote: post #186
rvz wrote: post #5

With this, human translators have been totally and absolutely a solved problem with this version of real time translation. This time is the most natural version that exists and it is a natural as a conversation. To Downvoters: Why aren't you feeling the AGI?

They most definitely did not solve real time translation yet. The French in the video is barely understandable, both the translation and the pronunciation are the quality of an American who hasn't used French since high-school.

This. It was shockingly bad. Non-"live" translations are much better.

It's exciting for the future, though!

Re: GPT‑Live

#218

Post by filoleg »

jonstaab wrote: post #76

This is the opposite direction AI should be going. Human relationships are the most valuable thing we have, and so, naturally, technology seeks to intermediate and now replace them. I'm not Catholic, but this podcast presents a very interesting argument against talking to AI as if they were human: https://newpolity.com/podcasts-hub/debate-chatbots

> This is the opposite direction AI should be going. Human relationships are the most valuable thing we have, and so, naturally, technology seeks to intermediate and now replace them.

Valid, but, I think, you conflate two separate things.

AI voice mode as a human socialization/conversation replacement? Cringe in my book, fully in agreement with you. Though my opinion on that aspect remains the same, regardless of whether it is done through text or voice.

AI voice mode as an alternative interface to interact with AI-as-a-tool? Great idea imo. There were a few instances where I was either too tired to type or wanted to brainstorm things in more of a freeform mode, for which a well-working voice mode would have been great.

Naturally, the current distinction between AI-as-a-personality and AI-as-a-tool exists purely on the user's end. All I know is that I want the latter a lot, and if some people want to use it for the former purpose, that's not my problem. Sadly, I think that it will be judged more on how an average person decides to use it (i.e., in the most degenerate/reductionist ways possible), as opposed to being judged on the merits of what it can actually be used for by someone who just treats it as a tool.

Re: GPT‑Live

#219

Post by gotrythis »

Last night, I was using voice for the first time in a few weeks, and it interrupted me and said, a bit aggressively...

"I'm going to stop you right there. Let's keep the conversation focused on the topic we were covering or a new relevant topic".

I tried to probe it for why it did that, what rules it was following, and it eventually told me...

"My role is to keep us focused..." and, "The behaviour you saw was my attempt to moderate tone".

I've heard of LLMs doing weird things like this, but it was the first time it happened to me. I hope they fix that. It was creepy.

For context, it heard my partner say, "I guess it's the same thing as you mom, because she's..." and then it cut us off.

Re: GPT‑Live

#220

Post by small_model »

zkmon wrote: post #174
amarant wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this line of reasoning. How are you hindered from doing any of those things? What part of "AI can now do X" makes it so you can't also do X?

I'm no longer writing code from scratch, as I used to do before. So, very soon, it will be "AI can now do X" makes it so I can't also do X? Same with many creative works. Radio music already sounds so plastic. I lost interest in crafting my text drafts because I can just dump some ugly text and get it refined by AI.

You no longer have to grow your own food, can go to supermarket, but doesnt stop you from still doing it.
Post reply on HN