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

GPT-6 Astra

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#931

Post by _zoltan_ »

Flere-Imsaho wrote: post #532
XCSme wrote: post #367

It's fun, but every new model release makes me even less interested to create cool stuff. Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds?

> Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds? I built a phone app recently, not released to the public, just an idea I had for ages but could never spend the time actually building. Its 100% vibe coded, and took me a few weekends to build... I'm talking a few hours in total. The point I'm making is that you now have the power to create stuff you would never have had the time to build. You can think…

I'd love to learn more about this as I have some toy app ideas as well :)

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#933

Post by angusturner »

sschueller wrote: post #248
orliesaurus wrote: post #74

I wonder if this is going to be one of those days where you'll be like: Oh yeah I remember where I was when the first version of AGI launched

Define AGI first. The singularly ain't going to happen with LLMs.

Define LLMs. Current models look pretty different to the vanilla transformer from 2017. And its not even known what architecture and training innovations the frontier is using, right?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#934

Post by jen729w »

makapuf wrote: post #862
throwaway13337 wrote: post #482

That hero video is interesting. A projector and speech. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I find speech to text / text to speech (but not live audio mode) is quite comfortable and effective for coding now. The speech to text part can be frustrating if your local tts model does not have word match context for coding. Codex desktop does this remotely well but is slow. I've been experimenting with local software for m…

given the fact that we've moved in my office from 3-people offices to open-plan office to flex desk now I'm not exactly sure I would want my coworkers to speak all day to their computers and gesturing / walking in front of a projector (provided there will still be coworkers with IA)

Haven't you been served the videos on LinkedIn where people have a thing strapped around their mouth that they can talk into? Apparently it traps the sound so your coworkers can't hear you.

Of course they're mercilessly mocking you instead, but hey.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#936

Post by jeffy29 »

astrobiased wrote: post #402

I can’t help but notice how much this echoes Francois Chollet’s On the Measure of Intelligence: https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547 Most of frontier-model progress still looks like skill acquisition optimization: broader benchmark coverage and performance, more domains absorbed into the training distribution, and increasingly strong performance within that surface area. It seems more about coverage-driven competence. So…

Define novel intelligence in a way that would not exclude 95% of humans, yourself included.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#937

Post by Sankozi »

altcognito wrote: post #803
kulkarniamey wrote: post #777

The model is probably excellent. The problem here is AGI having various definitions and many of them getting narrowed down to whatever makes benchmark numbers look good.

I'm not sure how you call a model AGI without it learning new information at the model level and not introducing nasty surprises (both from adversarial users and unintentional badness) I guess there is fine tuning (and RAG) for those that need something bigger than just the knowledge contained in the context.

The same is for humans, we don't learn on instinct level either.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#938

Post by willis936 »

jeffy29 wrote: post #936
astrobiased wrote: post #402

I can’t help but notice how much this echoes Francois Chollet’s On the Measure of Intelligence: https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547 Most of frontier-model progress still looks like skill acquisition optimization: broader benchmark coverage and performance, more domains absorbed into the training distribution, and increasingly strong performance within that surface area. It seems more about coverage-driven competence. So…

Define novel intelligence in a way that would not exclude 95% of humans, yourself included.

When I infer I also train.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#939

Post by danmaz74 »

z7 wrote: post #614
astrobiased wrote: post #402

I can’t help but notice how much this echoes Francois Chollet’s On the Measure of Intelligence: https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547 Most of frontier-model progress still looks like skill acquisition optimization: broader benchmark coverage and performance, more domains absorbed into the training distribution, and increasingly strong performance within that surface area. It seems more about coverage-driven competence. So…

Chollet writes he expects AGI now sooner than 2030, "given progress is happening faster than I expected." https://x.com/fchollet/status/2095607046129463577

I have no idea about timelines, but the current LLM architecture has no mechanism which could emulate online learning in a way similar to how it happens in humans and other animals. As another commenter wrote, there is no neuroplasticity while these systems interact with their environment in normal usage; adding information/constraints to the context partially mitigates this, but it's a completely different mechanism.

The RL phase is the most similar mechanism I know of that comes to my mind, but I'm not sure it could be adapted to fill that gap.

My totally unsubstantiated theory is that this is the missing link towards what most humans would consider AGI. I don't see this as intractable, but it may require some substantial change in architecture.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#940

Post by bsenftner »

jeffy29 wrote: post #936
astrobiased wrote: post #402

I can’t help but notice how much this echoes Francois Chollet’s On the Measure of Intelligence: https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547 Most of frontier-model progress still looks like skill acquisition optimization: broader benchmark coverage and performance, more domains absorbed into the training distribution, and increasingly strong performance within that surface area. It seems more about coverage-driven competence. So…

Define novel intelligence in a way that would not exclude 95% of humans, yourself included.

Comprehension, humans have it, animals have it in limited form, trained algorithms have none at all. The training process is our wholesale replacement for no artificial comprehension. If we ever develop artificial comprehension, that is AGI all by itself, no training required.
Post reply on HN