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

271–280 of 556 posts

Re: GPT‑Live

#271

Post by andai »

hackrmn wrote: post #260
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?

Fewer people aren't staring into their phones or talking to them -- makes your social antennas pick up automatically on not wanting to disturb them (lest you draw their ire for not having the social antennas long enough to pick up on the fact they're "busy and don't want to engage with you" like a gymrat with AirPods to signal they're there to pump in peace and quiet listening to their favourite playlist, not talk to…

There are still lots of social people. I found a lot of people actually do want to talk but are just shy.

I spent a few weeks at a hostel last year. It was always kind of depressing and tense in the shared kitchen, just this heavy silence.

I don't feel comfortable around strangers, so I solved that problem by just saying hi to everyone.

Most people didn't respond much, although most of them smiled and the tension was eased. But a few of them struck up conversation and we ended up making friends.

I ended up making like, ten new friends in two weeks. And then a bunch of them ended up becoming friends with each other as well.

Re: GPT‑Live

#272

Post by supern0va »

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…

Counter-point: I love that my rubber duck can talk (quack?) back, as well as record and summarize my thoughts on topics I'm working or stuck on.

I've wanted a good voice mode for precisely this reason. When I take my dog on a walk and I'm thinking about a bunch of problems/ideas, I'd love to have feedback and a record, or perhaps to even kick off research or ask questions to fill in gaps that would otherwise have me debating pulling out my phone to try to get an answer.

Re: GPT‑Live

#273

Post by daveguy »

SmirkingRevenge wrote: post #236
nullbio wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Fluid natural conversational AI is far more productive than any other interface for working with LLMs. Although I suppose you could make the argument that it should be more... Robotic like. Like in StarTrek. Which, is honestly probably better for work, too. A "get shit done" mode, of pure, cold, efficiency.

In one of the videos the AI quips back things like "Happens to the best of us" - its basically pretending to be human and that feels kind of creepy and weird, like it's trying to cultivate a para-social emotional bond. I just want voice assistants to reliably understand what I say and do what I mean So hopefully you can turn that off. There are plenty of applications for that more human conversational style though (f…

I doubt you can turn that off. That's how they upgrade it up from a tool to an engagement optimized addiction platform.

Re: GPT‑Live

#274

Post by nunez »

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?

Yes! Hey Grok was shipped to all Ryzen-based Teslas a year ago, I think. I don't use it but those that have found it useful.

Re: GPT‑Live

#275

Post by [deleted] »

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

[deleted]

Re: GPT‑Live

#276

Post by famouswaffles »

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!

People who do this kind of stuff are very irritating. You clearly have some problem with the work they do. Instead of saying and approaching that outright, you pass it in some passive aggressive fake bullshit. Makes you sound like the kind of person I would much rather not be speaking to, which is kind of ironic given your comment.

Re: GPT‑Live

#277

Post by motoxpro »

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.

I'm confused. It feels like you are saying you did those things as a means to an end.

Like saying I no longer walk because I can drive. I no longer cook because Doordash exists. I no longer play piano because midi exists.

I mean i guess, but it seems like you didn't LIKE crafting the text or coding from scratch, you just wanted the outcome. If we are talking purely about work, I understand that its about being productive and it sucks to have a job shift to something you enjoy less.

But for daily life? I dont see how it changes, maybe its a tech thing where people think about making their daily lives more productive, but most people dont.

Re: GPT‑Live

#279

Post by Martinussen »

This voice is awful, possibly one of the worst AI/computer voices I have heard in like two years now - what's up with that? Is this seriously the best a company burning this much money can do, and they consider this acceptable to release? Like two syllables in and my first response was to grimace and physically cringe. Does anyone here think this sounds good, or even just "fine enough"?

Do engineers that work on this for long periods of time stop seeing the forest for the trees and think this could be mistaken as human? I'm saying this as someone that assumes all narration/most VO work will be fully AI fairly soon (for better or worse.)...

Re: GPT‑Live

#280

Post by wewtyflakes »

Great to hear about full-duplex. When using voice mode historically, it was infuriating to have the AI go on a long-winded rant or explanation and I would be shouting again and again "stop. shut up. shut up! shut up!!!"; I just needed a clean way to interrupt it.
Post reply on HN