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

ChatGPT Pulse

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 766 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#141

Post by CuriouslyC »

jsheard wrote: post #76
jasonsb wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools. It feels like blockchain again in a lot of weird ways. It doesn't feel like blockchain at all. Blockchain is probably the most useless technology ever invented (unless you're a criminal or an influencer who makes ungodly amounts of money off of suckers). AI is a powerful tool for those who are willing to put in the work. People who have the time, knowledge and crit…

> My personal productivity has skyrocketed in the last 12 months. Has your productivity objectively, measurably improved or does it just feel like it has improved? Recall the METR study which caught programmers self-reporting they were 20% faster with AI when they were actually 20% slower.

If you want another data point, you can just look at my company github (https://github.com/orgs/sibyllinesoft/repositories). ~27 projects in the last 5 weeks, probably on the order of half a million lines of code, and multiple significant projects that are approaching ship readiness (I need to stop tuning algorithms and making stuff gorgeous and just fix installation/ensure cross platform is working, lol).

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#142

Post by groby_b »

I'm feeling obliged to rehash a quote from the early days of the Internet, when midi support was added: "If I wanted your web site to make sounds, I'd rub my finger on the screen"

Behind that flippant response lies a core principle. A computer is a tool. It should act on the request of the human using it, not by itself.

Scheduled prompts: Awesome. Daily nag screens to hook up more data sources: Not awesome.

(Also, from a practical POV: So they plan on creating a recommender engine to sell ads and media, I guess. Weehee. More garbage)

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#143

Post by WmWsjA6B29B4nfk »

bob1029 wrote: post #102

> Pulse introduces this future in its simplest form: personalized research and timely updates that appear regularly to keep you informed. Soon, Pulse will be able to connect with more of the apps you use so updates capture a more complete picture of your context. We’re also exploring ways for Pulse to deliver relevant work at the right moments throughout the day, whether it’s a quick check before a meeting, a reminde…

> OpenAI won’t start generating much revenue from free users and other products until next year. In 2029, however, it projects revenue from free users and other products will reach $25 billion, or one-fifth of all revenue.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#144

Post by [deleted] »

agency wrote: post #119
jasonsb wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Objectively. I’m now tackling tasks I wouldn’t have even considered two or three years ago, but the biggest breakthrough has been overcoming procrastination. When AI handles over 50% of the work, there’s a 90% chance I’ll finish the entire task faster than it would normally take me just to get started on something new.

> I’m now tackling tasks I wouldn’t have even considered two or three years ago Ok, so subjective

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#145

Post by jama211 »

jsheard wrote: post #76
jasonsb wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools. It feels like blockchain again in a lot of weird ways. It doesn't feel like blockchain at all. Blockchain is probably the most useless technology ever invented (unless you're a criminal or an influencer who makes ungodly amounts of money off of suckers). AI is a powerful tool for those who are willing to put in the work. People who have the time, knowledge and crit…

> My personal productivity has skyrocketed in the last 12 months. Has your productivity objectively, measurably improved or does it just feel like it has improved? Recall the METR study which caught programmers self-reporting they were 20% faster with AI when they were actually 20% slower.

Not this again. That study had serious problems.

But I’m not even going to argue about that. I want to raise something no one else seems to mention about AI in coding work. I do a lot of work now with AI that I used to code by hand, and if you told me I was 20% slower on average, I would say “that’s totally fine it’s still worth it” because the EFFORT level from my end feels so much less.

It’s like, a robot vacuum might take way longer to clean the house than if I did it by hand sure. But I don’t regret the purchase, because I have to do so much less _work_.

Coding work that I used to procrastinate about because it was tedious or painful I just breeze through now. I’m so much less burnt out week to week.

I couldn’t care less if I’m slower at a specific task, my LIFE is way better now I have AI to assist me with my coding work, and that’s super valuable no matter what the study says.

(Though I will say, I believe I have extremely good evidence that in my case I’m also more productive, averages are averages and I suspect many people are bad at using AI, but that’s an argument for another time).

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#146

Post by shafyy »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #141
jsheard wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My personal productivity has skyrocketed in the last 12 months. Has your productivity objectively, measurably improved or does it just feel like it has improved? Recall the METR study which caught programmers self-reporting they were 20% faster with AI when they were actually 20% slower.

If you want another data point, you can just look at my company github ( https://github.com/orgs/sibyllinesoft/repositories ). ~27 projects in the last 5 weeks, probably on the order of half a million lines of code, and multiple significant projects that are approaching ship readiness (I need to stop tuning algorithms and making stuff gorgeous and just fix installation/ensure cross platform is working, lol).

Lines of codes is not a measure of anything meaningful on its own. The mere fact that you suggest this as prove that you are more productive makes me think you are not.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#147

Post by 9rx »

buffalobuffalo wrote: post #139
9rx wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI is a powerful tool for those who are willing to put in the work. No more powerful than I without the A. The only advantage AI has over I is that it is cheaper, but that's the appeal of the blockchain as well: It's cheaper than VISA. The trouble with the blockchain is that it hasn't figured out how to be useful generally. Much like AI, it only works in certain niches. The past interest in the blockchain was premi…

Blockchain only has 2 legitimate uses (from an economic standpoint) as far as I can tell. 1) Bitcoin figured out how to create artificial scarcity, and got enough buy-in that the scarcity actually became valuable. 2)Some privacy coins serve an actual economic niche for illegal activity. Then there's a long list of snake oil uses, and competition with payment providers doesn't even crack the top 20 of those. Modern da…

Sounds like LLMs. The legitimate uses are:

1) Langauge tasks.

2) ...

I can't even think of what #2 is. If the technology gets better at writing code perhaps it can start to do other things by way of writing software to do it, but then you effectively have AGI, so...

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#148

Post by CuriouslyC »

shafyy wrote: post #146
CuriouslyC wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want another data point, you can just look at my company github ( https://github.com/orgs/sibyllinesoft/repositories ). ~27 projects in the last 5 weeks, probably on the order of half a million lines of code, and multiple significant projects that are approaching ship readiness (I need to stop tuning algorithms and making stuff gorgeous and just fix installation/ensure cross platform is working, lol).

Lines of codes is not a measure of anything meaningful on its own. The mere fact that you suggest this as prove that you are more productive makes me think you are not.

The SWE industry is eagerly awaiting your proposed accurate metric.

I find that people who dismiss LoC out of hand without supplying better metrics tend to be low performers trying to run for cover.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#149

Post by jama211 »

9rx wrote: post #89
jasonsb wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools. It feels like blockchain again in a lot of weird ways. It doesn't feel like blockchain at all. Blockchain is probably the most useless technology ever invented (unless you're a criminal or an influencer who makes ungodly amounts of money off of suckers). AI is a powerful tool for those who are willing to put in the work. People who have the time, knowledge and crit…

> AI is a powerful tool for those who are willing to put in the work. No more powerful than I without the A. The only advantage AI has over I is that it is cheaper, but that's the appeal of the blockchain as well: It's cheaper than VISA. The trouble with the blockchain is that it hasn't figured out how to be useful generally. Much like AI, it only works in certain niches. The past interest in the blockchain was premi…

But an I + and AI (as in a developer with access to AI tools) is as near as makes no difference the same price as just an I, and _can_ be better than just an I.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#150

Post by ElFitz »

dakiol wrote: post #107
SirensOfTitan wrote: post #27

My pulse today is just a mediocre rehash of prior conversations I’ve had on the platform. I tried to ask GPT-5 pro the other day to just pick an ambitious project it wanted to work on, and I’d carry out whatever physical world tasks it needed me to, and all it did was just come up with project plans which were rehashes of my prior projects framed as its own. I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools. It feels…

> I’m rapidly losing interest in all of these tools Same. It reminds me the 1984 event in which the computer itself famously “spoke” to the audience using its text-to-speech feature. Pretty amazing at that time, but nevertheless quite useless since then

It has proven very useful to a great number of people who, although they are a minority, have vastly benefited from TTS and other accessibility features.
Post reply on HN