Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.4

openai.com

161–170 of 868 posts

Re: GPT-5.4

#161
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have AI psychosis and think it's their boyfriend. The 5.x series have terrible writing styles, which is one way to cut down on sycophancy.

Somebody on Twitter used Claude code to connect… toys… as mcps to Claude chat. We’ve seen nothing yet.

My computer ethics teacher was obsessed with 'teledildonics' 30 years ago. There's nothing new under the sun.

Re: GPT-5.4

#162

The marquee feature is obviously the 1M context window, compared to the ~200k other models support with maybe an extra cost for generations beyond >200k tokens. Per the pricing page, there is no additional cost for tokens beyond 200k: https://openai.com/api/pricing/ Also per pricing, GPT-5.4 ($2.50/M input, $15/M output) is much cheaper than Opus 4.6 ($5/M input, $25/M output) and Opus has a penalty for its beta >200…

Yeah, long context vs compaction is always an interesting tradeoff. More information isn't always better for LLMs, as each token adds distraction, cost, and latency. There's no single optimum for all use cases. For Codex, we're making 1M context experimentally available, but we're not making it the default experience for everyone, as from our testing we think that shorter context plus compaction works best for most p…

> Curious to hear if people have use cases where they find 1M works much better!

Reverse engineering [1]. When decompiling a bunch of code and tracing functionality, it's really easy to fill up the context window with irrelevant noise and compaction generally causes it to lose the plot entirely and have to start almost from scratch.

(Side note, are there any OpenAI programs to get free tokens/Max to test this kind of stuff?)

[1] https://github.com/akiselev/ghidra-cli

Re: GPT-5.4

#164
post #45

The actual card is here https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/gpt-5-4-thinking/introdu... the link currently goes to the announcement.

I must have been sleeping when "sheet" "brief" "primer" etc become known as "cards". I really thought weirdly worded and unnecessary "announcement" linking to the actual info along with the word "card" were the results of vibe slop.

[dead]

Re: GPT-5.4

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-codex variant models in earlier version were just fine tuned for coding work, and had a little better performance for related tool calling and maybe instruction calling. in 5.4 it looks like the just collapsed that capability into the single frontier family model

Yes so I’m even more confused. Why would I use codex?

You choose gpt-5.4 in the /model picker inside the codex app/cli if you want.

Re: GPT-5.4

#166
post #15

If you don't want to click in, easy comparison with other 2 frontier models - https://x.com/OpenAI/status/2029620619743219811?s=20

Why do none of the benchmarks test for hallucinations?

Re: GPT-5.4

#167
post #78
post #33

Does this improve Tomahawk Missile accuracy?

They're already accurate within 5-10m at Mach 0.74 after traveling 2k+ km. Its 5m long so it seems pretty accurate. How much more could you expect?

You could definitely do better than that with image recognition for terminal guidance. But I would assume those published accuracy numbers are very conservative anyway..

Re: GPT-5.4

#168
post #5

"GPT‑5.4 interprets screenshots of a browser interface and interacts with UI elements through coordinate-based clicking to send emails and schedule a calendar event." They show an example of 5.4 clicking around in Gmail to send an email. I still think this is the wrong interface to be interacting with the internet. Why not use Gmail APIs? No need to do any screenshot interpretation or coordinate-based clicking.

Lots of services have no desire to ever expose an API. This approach lets you step right over that.

If an API is exposed you can just have the LLM write something against that.

Re: GPT-5.4

#169

The marquee feature is obviously the 1M context window, compared to the ~200k other models support with maybe an extra cost for generations beyond >200k tokens. Per the pricing page, there is no additional cost for tokens beyond 200k: https://openai.com/api/pricing/ Also per pricing, GPT-5.4 ($2.50/M input, $15/M output) is much cheaper than Opus 4.6 ($5/M input, $25/M output) and Opus has a penalty for its beta >200…

Why would some one use codex instead?

When it comes to lengthy non-trivial work, codex is much better but also slower.
Post reply on HN