Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zune .NET O3... shudders
XBOX Series X
What's the X short for?
It's short for XBOX.
There's three Xs.
They're all short for XBOX.
OpenAI o3-pro
201–209 of 209 posts
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can write projects with LLMs thanks to tools that can analyze your local project's context, which didn't exist a year ago. You could use Cursor, Windsurf, Q CLI, Claude Code, whatever else with Claude 3 or even an older model and you'd still get usable results. It's not the models which have enabled "vibe coding", it's the tools. An additional proof of that is that the new models focus more and more on coding in…
Chatgpt itself has gotten much better at producing and reading code since a year ago, in my experience
They're using a specific model for that, and since they can't access private GitHub repos like MS, they rely on code shared by devs, which keeps growing every month.
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are humans who cannot do arc agi though so how does an LLM not doing it mean that LLMs don’t have general intelligence? LLMs have obviously reached the point where they are smarter than almost every person alive, better at maths, physics, biology, English, foreign languages, etc. But because they can’t solve this honestly weird visual/spatial reasoning test they aren’t intelligent? That must mean most humans on…
> LLMs have obviously reached the point where they are smarter than almost every person alive, better at maths, physics, biology, English, foreign languages, etc. I dont think memorizing stuff is the same as being smart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room > But because they can’t solve this honestly weird visual/spatial reasoning test they aren’t intelligent? Yes. Being intelligent is about recognizing patter…
The LLMs are not just memorising stuff though, they solve math and physics problems better than almost every person alive. Problems they've never seen before. They write code which has never been seen before better than like 95% of active software engineers.
I love how the bar for are LLMs smart just goes up every few months.
In a year it will be, well, LLMs didn't create totally breakthrough new Quantum Physics, it's still not as smart as us... lol
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
> LLMs have obviously reached the point where they are smarter than almost every person alive, better at maths, physics, biology, English, foreign languages, etc. I dont think memorizing stuff is the same as being smart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room > But because they can’t solve this honestly weird visual/spatial reasoning test they aren’t intelligent? Yes. Being intelligent is about recognizing patter…
The LLMs are not just memorising stuff though, they solve math and physics problems better than almost every person alive. Problems they've never seen before. They write code which has never been seen before better than like 95% of active software engineers. I love how the bar for are LLMs smart just goes up every few months. In a year it will be, well, LLMs didn't create totally breakthrough new Quantum Physics, it'…
[deleted]
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm really hoping GPT5 is a larger jump in metrics than the last several releases we've seen like Claude3.5 - Claude4 or o3-mini-high to o3-pro. This kind of expectations explains why there hasn't been a GPT-5 so far, and why we get a dumb numbering scheme instead for no reason. At least Claude eventually decided not to care anymore and release Claude 4 even if the jump from 3.7 isn't particularly spectacular. We'r…
> We're well into the diminishing returns at this point Scaling laws, by definition have always had diminishing returns because it's a power law relationship with compute/params/data, but I am assuming you mean diminishing beyond what the scaling laws predict. Unless you know the scale of e.g. o3-pro vs GPT-4, you can't definitively say that. Because of that power law relationship, it requires adding a lot of compute…
> but I am assuming you mean diminishing beyond what the scaling laws predict.
You're assuming wrong, in fact focusing on scaling law underestimate the rate of progress as there is also a steady stream algorithmic improvements.
But still, even though hardware and software progress, we are facing diminishing returns and that means that there's no reason to believe that we will see another leap as big as GPT-3.5 to GPT-4 in a single release. At least until we stumble upon radically new algorithms that reset the game.
I don't think it make any economic sense to wait until you have your “10x model” when you can release 2 or 3 incremental models in the meantime, at which point your “x10” becomes an incremental improvement in itself.
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
> LLMs have obviously reached the point where they are smarter than almost every person alive, better at maths, physics, biology, English, foreign languages, etc. I dont think memorizing stuff is the same as being smart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room > But because they can’t solve this honestly weird visual/spatial reasoning test they aren’t intelligent? Yes. Being intelligent is about recognizing patter…
The LLMs are not just memorising stuff though, they solve math and physics problems better than almost every person alive. Problems they've never seen before. They write code which has never been seen before better than like 95% of active software engineers. I love how the bar for are LLMs smart just goes up every few months. In a year it will be, well, LLMs didn't create totally breakthrough new Quantum Physics, it'…
Well... There are two perspectives. Llms are smarter than we thought or people are stupider than we thought.
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
> LLMs have obviously reached the point where they are smarter than almost every person alive, better at maths, physics, biology, English, foreign languages, etc. I dont think memorizing stuff is the same as being smart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room > But because they can’t solve this honestly weird visual/spatial reasoning test they aren’t intelligent? Yes. Being intelligent is about recognizing patter…
The LLMs are not just memorising stuff though, they solve math and physics problems better than almost every person alive. Problems they've never seen before. They write code which has never been seen before better than like 95% of active software engineers. I love how the bar for are LLMs smart just goes up every few months. In a year it will be, well, LLMs didn't create totally breakthrough new Quantum Physics, it'…
All code has been seen before, thats why LLMs are so good at writing it.
I agree things are looking up for LLMs, but the semantics do matter here. In my experience LLMs are still pretty bad at solving novel problems(like arc agi 2) which is why I do not believe they have much intelligence. They seem to have started doing it a little, but are still mostly regurgitating.
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#208I am still not willing to upgrade to a Pro account. I pay $20 a month for both Gemini and ChatGPT, and for what I need this is currently enough. I have dreamed of having powerful AI ever since I read Bertram Raphael's great book Mind Inside Matter around 1978, getting hooked on AI research and sometimes practical applications for my life since then. I can easily afford $200 for a Pro account but I get this nagging fe…
Can you expand any more on the nagging feeling?
Re: OpenAI o3-pro
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need a Pro account. I'm on the free tier and I'm paying for o3-pro via the API. I spent just $3.70 in credits yesterday to compare it against Claude 4 Opus.
what do you use as a client? Most open source clients don't seem to support the new endpoint that o3-pro requires.
I was using the OpenAI Codex CLI