Damn, you guys are toxic. So -- they did not invent AGI yet. Yet, I like what I'm seeing. Major progress on multiple fronts. Hallucination fix is exciting on its own. The React demos were mindblowing.
GPT-5
241–250 of 1001 posts
Re: GPT-5
#242Important note from the livestream: "With GPT-5, we're actually deprecating all of our previous models"
Re: GPT-5
#243These presenters all give off such a “sterile” vibe
Re: GPT-5
#244What's going on with their SWE bench graph?[0] GPT-5 non-thinking is labeled 52.8% accuracy, but o3 is shown as a much shorter bar, yet it's labeled 69.1%. And 4o is an identical bar to o3, but it's labeled 30.8%... [0] https://i.postimg.cc/DzkZZLry/y-axis.png
Re: GPT-5
#245it's good that they've been working on gpt-5's abilities to eulogi\e us for when it kills us.
Re: GPT-5
#246ChatGPT5 in this demo: > For an airplane wing (airfoil), the top surface is curved and the bottom is flatter. When the wing moves forward: > * Air over the top has to travel farther in the same amount of time -> it moves faster -> pressure on the top decreases. > * Air underneath moves slower -> pressure underneath is higher > * The presure difference creates an upward force - lift Isn't that explanation of why wings…
Re: GPT-5
#247The marketing copy and the current livestream appear tautological: "it's better because it's better." Not much explanation yet why GPT-5 warrants a major version bump. As usual, the model (and potentially OpenAI as a whole) will depend on output vibe checks.
its >o3 performance at gpt4 price. seems pretty obvious
GPT-5 pricing: $10/Mtok out
What am I missing?
Re: GPT-5
#248Re: GPT-5
#249I am a synthetic biologist, and I use AI a lot for my work. And it constantly denies my questions RIGHT NOW. But of course OpenAI and Anthropic have to implement more - from the GPT5 introduction: "robust safety stack with a multilayered defense system for biology"
While that sounds nice and all, in practical terms, they already ban many of my questions. This just means they're going to lobotomize the model more and more for my field because of the so-called "experts". I am an expert. I can easily go read the papers myself. I could create a biological weapon if I wanted to with pretty much zero papers at all, since I have backups of genbank and the like (just like most chemical engineers could create explosives if they wanted to). But they are specifically targeting my field, because they're from OpenAI and they know what is best.
It just sucks that some of the best tools for learning are being lobotomized specifically for my field because of people in AI believe that knowledge should be kept secret. It's extremely antithetical to the hacker spirit that knowledge should be free.
That said, deep research and those features make it very difficult to switch, but I definitely have to try harder now that I see where the wind is blowing.
Re: GPT-5
#250The marketing copy and the current livestream appear tautological: "it's better because it's better." Not much explanation yet why GPT-5 warrants a major version bump. As usual, the model (and potentially OpenAI as a whole) will depend on output vibe checks.
We’re at the audiophile stage of LLMs where people are talking about the improved soundstage, tonality, reduced sibilance etc