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

221–230 of 556 posts

Re: GPT‑Live

#221

Post by 100ms »

purpleidea wrote: post #213
100ms wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think that's mostly just a frequency shift :) You could probably recreate it with another model and some effects on top. Also, why the hell not for voice mode haha.

Re: GPT‑Live

#222

Post by derefr »

jjulius wrote: post #150
simonw wrote: post #19

I had preview access to this one for a few weeks. It's very good. I had one conversation that lasted a full hour while I was walking the dog, got some good brainstorming done against one of my projects. The best feature is that it can delegate questions out to GPT-5.5 in the background, so you're no longer restricted to a voice model that's several years behind the frontier. I did report a fun bug with it though: it…

I highly recommend simply enjoying the walk.

Given the personality type common on HN, I imagine that the GP, even if unplugged from all technology on their walk, wouldn't be in a mindful state of enjoying their surroundings, but rather would be "lost in the clouds", stewing on the same ideas/thoughts/problems; but with those thoughts going more in circles, due to a lack of ability to verify anything.

Re: GPT‑Live

#223

Post by BeetleB »

mlsu wrote: post #111
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

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.

> Yes, every minute you spend texting or talking to a chatbot is a minute that you'd have spent talking to another human beings.

Human beings tend not to be available (results vary by culture).

Also, imagine you're 82 years old and living alone (e.g. widower). It is believed that lack of interaction is a significant driver of cognitive decline (which is why being hard of hearing accelerates the onset of dementia). I wonder if having an LLM to talk to under those circumstances will decelerate cognitive decline?

Re: GPT‑Live

#224

Post by WhitneyLand »

Much better than it was before but it’s still significantly weaker than a direct chat.

For example I asked

“Why should LLM attention use dot product instead of cosine similarity, being that we often hear vector magnitude does not encode most of the useful information needed”?

The voice response was directionally right but lacked detail and was a little hand wavy.

The answer to the same question in a text chat was much higher quality.

The voice response replied “let me think about that…” so it appears to be invoking 5.5 as advertised, but it’s definitely weaker.

I had reasoning set the same for both.

Re: GPT‑Live

#225

Post by mock-possum »

jjulius wrote: post #150
simonw wrote: post #19

I had preview access to this one for a few weeks. It's very good. I had one conversation that lasted a full hour while I was walking the dog, got some good brainstorming done against one of my projects. The best feature is that it can delegate questions out to GPT-5.5 in the background, so you're no longer restricted to a voice model that's several years behind the frontier. I did report a fun bug with it though: it…

I highly recommend simply enjoying the walk.

… but it sounds like they did enjoy the walk, doesn’t it?

Re: GPT‑Live

#226

Post by tiahura »

cj wrote: post #210
artdigital wrote: post #25

What I’m missing from this announcement is the capability to use connectors and tools. I don’t really get it - NONE of the frontier assistants can use tools / connectors while in voice mode - Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok. It seems so obvious: I want to be able to research stuff, pull up documents, jot down notes and do productive work while I’m talking to it, and not end voice mode whenever I need to connect to an a…

There's a tiktok of Sam Altman reacting to a viral clip of someone using Voice to time themselves on a mile run (it hilariously failed). Sam's reaction was "Yea, it doesn't have access to tools like a timer. It's a known issue. Should be coming in about a year" Edit: here's the clip: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Py2YgJe8fqQ

A year? Is it that hard, or do they not see the value?

Re: GPT‑Live

#227

Post by derefr »

magicalist wrote: post #144
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Click through to the link, the answer is no it uses the latest gpt models now.

> the answer is no it uses the latest gpt models now. Actually it says it _can_ delegate to the latest models. Seems reasonable to ask how the voice model does when it doesn't delegate (or while waiting for the delegated answer).

I haven't stress-tested it, but I would imagine it approaches complex problems the same way a human with a phone in their pocket would — that is, by having a degree of awareness of the confidence it has in its own knowledge in some areas; where, when it "realizes that it doesn't know", it blocks the conversation with statements like "I don't know, let me check."

I say this because this is already how ChatGPT works internally when using its "auto" mode; the version of the "fast" model used in the "auto" mode does the same "notice your ignorance and bring in the heavy model" thing, just silently, rather than mentioning that it's doing it.

(If someone has actually run the experiment, please chime in!)

Re: GPT‑Live

#228

Post by overfeed »

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!

> if this stuff further exarcerbates the loneliness epidemic and atomization of society, will you be able to live with yourself you think?

Looking at the 30,000-foot view of how society is set up: laws, economic system, employee incentives, etc, do you suppose it matters what the individual contributors think? I say this not to absolve anyone of responsibility, but to point out the obvious outcomes of our incentives across the strata (polity -> shareholders -> boards -> C-suite -> employees)

I will bet you dollars to donuts, somewhere inside OpenAI is a frequently-used revenue dashboard, but not for loneliness - if anything, OpenAI will make horny models and tout itself as a solution to loneliness, a la character.ai - if that earns them more money.

Re: GPT‑Live

#229

Post by BeetleB »

simonw wrote: post #19

I had preview access to this one for a few weeks. It's very good. I had one conversation that lasted a full hour while I was walking the dog, got some good brainstorming done against one of my projects. The best feature is that it can delegate questions out to GPT-5.5 in the background, so you're no longer restricted to a voice model that's several years behind the frontier. I did report a fun bug with it though: it…

I should give these voice models another try.

I have friends who have brainstormed with an LLM (voice chat) for 10-30 minutes, and reported very positive experiences.

When I speak to one - while I'm impressed at how far they've progressed - the LLM just doesn't talk like someone I'd want to discuss a technical problem with (the way I would with a human).

(And my friends aren't even using a custom prompt - some of them are just talking to the default Gemini on their phone!)

Re: GPT‑Live

#230

Post by Citizen_Lame »

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…

Bit naive world view. There are forces of rich and powerful who's only purpose is to maintain their status.

So thinking corporations and such were created to push human progress is laughable.

Post reply on HN