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

OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

the-decoder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 258 posts

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#111

Post by mrbombastic »

goalieca wrote: post #103
grafmax wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realized they jumped the shark when they announced the pivots to ads and porn. Markets haven’t caught on yet.

The porn pivot makes perfect sense. Porn is already quite fake and unconvincing and none of that matters.

It might not matter as far as profitability is concerned, ethically the second order effects will be very problematic. I am no puritan but the widespread availability of porn has already affected peoples sexual expectations greatly. AI generated porn is going to remove even more guardrails for behavior previously considered deviant, people will view and bring those expectations back to real life.

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#112

Post by bradly »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #65
grafmax wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realized they jumped the shark when they announced the pivots to ads and porn. Markets haven’t caught on yet.

The porn / sex-chat one is really disappointing. It seems they've given up even pretending that they are trying to do something beneficial for society. This is just a pure society-be-damned money grab.

My hunch is that they don't have a way to stop anything, so they are creating verticals to at least contain porn, medical, higher-ed users.

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#113

Post by Topfi »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #81
llm_nerd wrote: post #46

Yann LeCun's "Hoisted by their own GPTards" is fantastic.

While Yann is clearly brilliant, and has a deeper understanding of the roots of the filed than many of us mortals, I think he's been on a debbie downer trend lately, and more importantly, some of his public stances have been proven wrong in mere months / years after he made them. I remember a public talk, where he was on the stage with some young researcher from MS. (I think it was one of the authors of the "sparks o…

> AIME is saturated (with tool use) [...]

But isn't tool use kinda the crux here?

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but wasn't the argument back then on whether LLMs could solve maths problems without e.g. writing python to solve? Cause when "Sparks of AGI" came out in March, prompting gpt-3.5-turbo to code solutions to assist solving maths problems over just solving them directly was already established and seemed like the path forward. Heck, it is still the way to go, despite major advancements.

Given that, was he truly mistaken on his assertions regarding LLMs solving maths? Same for "planning".

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#114

Post by creativeCak3 »

random9749832 wrote: post #20

You are telling me a language model trained on Reddit can't solve novel problems? Shocking. Edit: we are in peak damage control phase of the hype cycle.

Can't wait for the Buble to burst so we can get back to solving real problems (like the fact that we have very little competition in the CPU market right now, AMD is getting way too comfortable...). I do think though that when this bubble bursts it will hurt the machine learning field (which does have people doing practically useful stuff like protein folding) and investors might pull all funding because this generative nonsense(which has no real use beyond generating porn) will taint the entire field, even the parts of it that are actually useful.

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#115

Post by card_zero »

znkr wrote: post #77
frays wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be missing context here, but I'm surprised to see Yann using language that plays on 'retard.' That seems out of character for him - more like something I'd expect from Elon Musk. What's the context I'm missing?

I don’t think it’s a wordplay with the r-word, but rather a reference to the famous Shakespeare quote: “Hoist with his own petard”. It’s become an English proverb. (A petard is a smallish bomb)

From péter, to fart.

Possibly entered the language as a saying due to Shakespeare being scurrilous.

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#116

Post by chanux »

goalieca wrote: post #103
grafmax wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realized they jumped the shark when they announced the pivots to ads and porn. Markets haven’t caught on yet.

The porn pivot makes perfect sense. Porn is already quite fake and unconvincing and none of that matters.

And there's no escape. The Internet was built for gambling and this.

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#117

Post by glenstein »

Timsky wrote: post #86

> GPT-5 is proving useful as a literature review assistant No, it does not. It only produces a highly convincing counterfeit. I am honestly happy for people who are satisfied with its output: life is way easier for them than for me. Obviously, the machine discriminates me personally. When I spend hours in the library looking for some engineering-related math made in the 70s-80s, as a last resort measure, I can try to…

Struggling to understand this one. Is it that (1) it's lopsided toward reference materials found on the modern internet and not as useful for reviewing literature from the Before Times or (2) it's offering specific solutions but you're skeptical of them?

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#118

Post by goalieca »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #81
llm_nerd wrote: post #46

Yann LeCun's "Hoisted by their own GPTards" is fantastic.

While Yann is clearly brilliant, and has a deeper understanding of the roots of the filed than many of us mortals, I think he's been on a debbie downer trend lately, and more importantly, some of his public stances have been proven wrong in mere months / years after he made them. I remember a public talk, where he was on the stage with some young researcher from MS. (I think it was one of the authors of the "sparks o…

> LLMs can't do math. He went on to "argue" that LLMs trick you with poetry that sounds good, but is highly subjective, and when tested on hard verifiable problems like math, they fail.

They really can’t. Token prediction based on context does not reason. You can scramble to submit PRs to ChatGPT to keep up with the “how many Rs in blueberry” kind of problems but it’s clear they can’t even keep up with shitposters on reddit.

And your 2nd and third point about planning and compounding errors remain challenges.. probably unsolvable with LLM approaches.

Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened

#119

Post by crazygringo »

Timsky wrote: post #86

> GPT-5 is proving useful as a literature review assistant No, it does not. It only produces a highly convincing counterfeit. I am honestly happy for people who are satisfied with its output: life is way easier for them than for me. Obviously, the machine discriminates me personally. When I spend hours in the library looking for some engineering-related math made in the 70s-80s, as a last resort measure, I can try to…

In my experience doing literature super-deep-dives, it hallucinates sources about 50% of the time. (For higher-level literature surveys, it's maybe 5%.)

Of the other 50% that are real, it's often ~evenly split into sources I'm familiar with and sources I'm not.

So it's hugely useful in surfacing papers that I may very well never have found otherwise using e.g. Google Scholar. It's particularly useful in finding relevant work in parallel subfields -- e.g. if you work in physics but it turns out their are math results, or you work in political science and it turns out there are relevant findings from anthropology. And also just obscure stuff -- a random thesis that never got published or cited but the PDF is online and turns out to be relevant.

It doesn't matter if 75% of the results are not useful to me or hallucinated. Those only waste me minutes. The other 25% more than make up for it -- they're things I simply might never find otherwise.

Post reply on HN