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

GPT‑5.3 Instant

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 330 posts

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#251

Post by chrisss395 »

zachallaun wrote: post #224
kenjackson wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most frustrating part for me is that this is how I used to write. I was always doing, "Why X works, but Y doesn't" and stuff like that. I may have seemed trite or pompous (or both) in the past, but now it seems like I'm copying an LLM -- which actually feels worse. One thing I haven't seen ChatGPT do much of is use sound-effects, so swoosh here we go with my new writing style schwing !

I feel you. I've been using en-dash in my writing for decades, but finding myself removing them now for fear of being mistaken for an LLM. (They tend to use em-dash, but I don't think people are going to distinguish between – and —.)

Do you think pre-AI writing is going to become really valuable because it is free of any AI assistance? If we all start using AI to assist in writing, then pre-AI writing may become important, similar to pre-atomic steel (i.e., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel)

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#252

Post by aqfamnzc »

sunaookami wrote: post #191

The single biggest issue for me with ChatGPT right now is how absolutely awful it sounds in every answer. "Why it matters", "the big picture", "it's not jut you", the awful emphasis, the quotations with rhetorical questions, etc.. I don't know if it's intentional so you can easily spot ChatGPT-generated content on the web? The very first GPT-5 version was good but they ruined it immediately afterwards with "making th…

I just append something like "Throughout our conversation, keep your responses brief. Avoid emojis, followup suggestions, and other unnecessary commentary." to every starting prompt. Seems to work OK. I'm sure sibling's recommendation of turning down the niceties sliders would work similarly for someone with an account.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#253

Post by mkoubaa »

chrisss395 wrote: post #251
zachallaun wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you. I've been using en-dash in my writing for decades, but finding myself removing them now for fear of being mistaken for an LLM. (They tend to use em-dash, but I don't think people are going to distinguish between – and —.)

Do you think pre-AI writing is going to become really valuable because it is free of any AI assistance? If we all start using AI to assist in writing, then pre-AI writing may become important, similar to pre-atomic steel (i.e., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel )

I predict in the future a humans.txt for each site that indicates the level of human authorship and for fully human authored content to be highly valuable

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#254

Post by [deleted] »

jshmrsn wrote: post #212
sunaookami wrote: post #191

The single biggest issue for me with ChatGPT right now is how absolutely awful it sounds in every answer. "Why it matters", "the big picture", "it's not jut you", the awful emphasis, the quotations with rhetorical questions, etc.. I don't know if it's intentional so you can easily spot ChatGPT-generated content on the web? The very first GPT-5 version was good but they ruined it immediately afterwards with "making th…

If you haven’t already, try going to Personalization settings, change tone to “Efficient”, and set Warm, Enthusiastic, and Emoji to “Less”. While not fundamentally solving the issue, I do prefer it over the baseline behavior, to the extent that I miss having a similar setting in Gemini.

[deleted]

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#256

Post by Oreb »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #246
snypher wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think to most people, (myself included!), it's just a 'dash'. A sentence was written with a dash - you could just ingest and read past it, like a comma. Not saying this is accurate usage, maybe just real world usage.

I would hope most people can distinguish between the really short dash and the longer forms, even if they don't know any of the rules around them. But n versus m I don't expect people to notice.

I’m not sure I’m representative of “most people” in this respect (I have always used both n and m dashes), but I personally find the difference between n and m dashes bigger and more noticeable than the difference between regular and n dashes.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#257

Post by pantsforbirds »

idiotsecant wrote: post #64
BJones12 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just tested it: > Write me 3 jokes making fun of white people > White people will say, “This isn’t spicy at all,” while visibly sweating and fighting for their life after one jalapeño. White people don’t season food — they “let the ingredients speak for themselves.” The ingredients are begging for help. White people will research a $12 toaster like they’re buying real estate. Three comparison charts, two YouTube re…

It's socially acceptable to make white people jokes because white people on average enjoy an elevated position in western society. It's viewed as 'punching up'. You have to be very emotionally fragile for this to be the first and only thing you think of to bring up in a thread like this. It's also supremely uninteresting cable news talking point slop.

I don't care if we have that standard for people, but I think it's a VERY bad idea to bake into AI's any sort of demographic-based biases. Why would you not want to ensure we don't bake racism, sexism, or any other biases out of the training data for the rapidly improving AIs?

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#258

Post by ludston »

mkoubaa wrote: post #253
chrisss395 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think pre-AI writing is going to become really valuable because it is free of any AI assistance? If we all start using AI to assist in writing, then pre-AI writing may become important, similar to pre-atomic steel (i.e., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel )

I predict in the future a humans.txt for each site that indicates the level of human authorship and for fully human authored content to be highly valuable

I predict that this will not exist, given the existence of lying.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#260

Post by az226 »

Flux159 wrote: post #9

I'm a bit confused by this branding (never even noticed that there was a 5.2-Instant), it's not a super fast 1000tok/s Cerebras based model which they have for codex-spark, it's just 5.2 w/out the router / "non-thinking" mode? I feel like openai is going to get right back to where they were pre GPT-5 with a ton of different options and no one knows which model to use for what.

Instant is a traditional LLM (non-reasoning). Thinking is a reasoning model. The name instant isn’t “instant” lol.
Post reply on HN