181–190 of 527 posts
Any quick impressions of o3 vs o1? We've got one inference in our product that only o1 has seemed to handle well, wondering if o3 can replace it.
I have a very basic / stupid "Turing test" which is just to write a base 62 converter in C#. I would think this exact thing would be in github somewhere (thus in the weights) but has always failed for me in the past (non-scientific / didn't try every single model). Using o4-mini-high, it actually did produce a working implementation after a bit of prompting. So yeah, today, this test passed which is cool.
Unless I'm misunderstanding what you are asking the model to do, Gemini 2.5 pro just passed this easily. https://g.co/gemini/share/e2876d310914
However, looking at the code that Gemini wrote in the link, it does the same thing that other LLMs often do, which is to assume that we are encoding individual long values. I assume there must be a github repo or stackoverflow question in the weights somewhere that is pushing it in this direction but it is a little odd. Naturally, this isn't the kind encoder that someone would normally want. Typically it should encode a byte array and return a string (or maybe encode / decode UTF8 strings directly). Having the interface use a long is very weird and not very useful.
In any case, I suspect with a bit more prompting you might be able to get gemini to do the right thing.
So at this point OpenAI has 6 reasoning models, 4 flagship chat models, and 7 cost optimized models. So that's 17 models in total and that's not even counting their older models and more specialized ones. Compare this with Anthropic that has 7 models in total and 2 main ones that they promote. This is just getting to be a bit much, seems like they are trying to cover for the fact that they haven't actually done much.…
"haven't actually done much" being popularizing the chat llm and absolutely dwarfing the competition in paid usage
The person you're responding to is correct that OpenAI feels a lot more stagnant than other players (like Google, which was nowhere to be seen even one year and a half ago and now has the leading model on pretty much every metric, but also DeepSeek, who built a competitive model in a year that runs for much cheaper).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who doesn't use anything OpenAI (for all the reasons), I have to agree with the GP. It's all baffling. Why is there an o3-mini and an o4-mini? Why on earth are there so many models? Once you get to this point you're putting the paradox of choice on the user - I used to use a particular brand toothpaste for years until it got to the point where I'd be in the supermarket looking at a wall of toothpaste all b…
> Why is there an o3-mini and an o4-mini? Why on earth are there so many models? Because if they removed access to o3-mini — which I have tested, costed, and built around — I would be very angry. I will probably switch to o4-mini when the time is right.
As a consumer, it is so exhausting keeping up with what model I should or can be using for the task I want to accomplish.
As a consumer, it is so exhausting keeping up with what model I should or can be using for the task I want to accomplish.
Gemini 2.5 Pro for every single task was the meta until this release. Will have to reassess now.
So at this point OpenAI has 6 reasoning models, 4 flagship chat models, and 7 cost optimized models. So that's 17 models in total and that's not even counting their older models and more specialized ones. Compare this with Anthropic that has 7 models in total and 2 main ones that they promote. This is just getting to be a bit much, seems like they are trying to cover for the fact that they haven't actually done much.…
That's not a problem in and of itself. It's only a problem if the models aren't good enough.
Judging by ChatGPT's adoption, people seem to think they're doing just fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Im old enough to remember the mystery and hype before o*/o1/strawberry that was supposed to be essentially AGI. We had serious news outlets write about senior people at OpenAI quitting because o1 was SkyNet Now we're up to o4, AGI is still not even in near site (depending on your definition, I know). And OpenAI is up to about 5000 employees. I'd think even before AGI a new model would be able to cover for at least 45…
> Im old enough to remember the mystery and hype before o*/o1/strawberry So at least two years old?
Oh, not that I haven't been as knocked about in the interim, of course. I'm not really claiming I'm better, and these are frightening times; I hope I'm neither projecting nor judging too harshly. But even trying to discount for the possibility, there still seems something new left to explain.