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

OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

om.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 281 posts

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#261

Post by dannersy »

lukan wrote: post #225
dannersy wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it is wild seeing with my eyes how bad these tools are in a lot of cases. We do have some vibe coders on our team but they basically are banned from my current project because they completely ruin the design and nuke throughput. HN would have me believe I'm a Luddite who shouldn't be writing code, however. I truly do not understand how to reconcile this experience and many times it is too complicated a topic to…

No, these tools are really great in a lot of cases. But they still don't have general intelligence or true understanding of anything - so if people using them wrong and rely on their output because it looks good and not because they verified it, then this is on the people using them.

I mean, that is fine, but then it seems like people at large are not using them "right". I think you'll find that since these tools are convenient and produce a lot of code in terms of lines, that verifying goes out the window. Due diligence was hard before these tools existed.

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#262

Post by orphea »

wewewedxfgdf wrote: post #61

OpenAI needs to focus on how Claude is leaving them in the dust for LLM assisted coding.

I've been using 5.3-Codex. I cannot proof because it's subjective, but I have better results (you could say more reasonable) with it than 4.6 Opus.

GPT-5.4 one-shot a cross-language issue (a C++ repo + some amount of Lua), Opus kept hallutinating. This was debugging, not codegen.

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#263

Post by lelanthran »

Esophagus4 wrote: post #260
lelanthran wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you really believe ChatGPT will lose significant users? I didn't say I believed that, I said that the reasons provided (for people to stick with it) were, to me, insufficient reasons. The examples of people sticking with a product undergoing enshittification are not representative of the type of product that ChatGPT is. Those other products you mentioned had a strong moat - network effects. Users had to stick wi…

I just can’t imagine anyone really bothering to switch, tbh. Even for a less enshittified product. For a better product, sure. Like if Google hadn’t rolled out Gemini in Search, ChatGPT would’ve crushed them. But not because of lack of ads in ChatGPT, because it was a better search product. Google Search doesn’t have a network effect right? And people still tolerate their ads… they have 90% marketshare. People still…

> Google Search doesn’t have a network effect right?

In this specific case it does :-

1. People go to google because it is more likely to have the result they are looking for[1],

2. So, people can't search elsewhere, because the network of sites are on google and they lose that if they switch.

--------------------

[1] Well, until recently, anyway. Still, sites prioritise and optimise for Google search ranking above all other indexes.

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#264

Post by lavezzi »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #203
smcin wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polymarket (for whatever it's worth) currently has OpenAI IPO at only 4% by end June and 40% by end December (and that's even for a small-float IPO as has become common). https://polymarket.com/event/openai-ipo-by

What is this supposed to imply? You can't reasonably draw any conclusion from betting without understanding who is betting and why. Well, I suppose you can draw the conclusion that "polymarket customers are interested in this topic"

It’s legalised insider trading. So you can always assume at this point that someone who knows will be cashing out.

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#266

Post by danny_codes »

tmatsuzaki wrote: post #123

I feel like OpenAI has been executing extremely well since it started leaning harder into Codex. Right now, the people who really see it are power users of AI and software engineers. Most equity investors still don’t seem to get it. It feels like the calm before the storm. A lot of the groundwork is being laid quietly beneath the surface. And at least in the country where I live, I can already feel real momentum buil…

The question is, does the storm result in a winner take all, or do companies go, hey look at that open model that has roughly the same performance, let me buy that from AWS for 1/50th the cost. Curious to see how companies react in the inevitable post-subsidized world

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#267

Post by danny_codes »

KellyCriterion wrote: post #231
phist_mcgee wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, claude will follow soon enough. It's not like anthropic faces different financial pressures than openai.

In case of Anthropic I just expect them to raise prices sky-high :-D What would be the price at which you would stop subscribing? Im in tech, so I would willing to pay around up to 100 - 120 USd per month, Id guess (Im currently onthe 20 USD plan, which is supercheap and contains enough tokens currently) But most private users ("at home") would not pay 100 USD+ per month? Spotify is around ~ 240/250 USD per year

Private users can switch to kimi. Model performs basically the same on programming tasks and is 10x cheaper. Why pay for a fat subscription when you can get an equivalent product for less?

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#268

Post by danny_codes »

andreynering wrote: post #197
keyle wrote: post #9

Time to jump ship. I have noticed 5.3 in xtra high was a turd today. High used to be enough for most of my use cases. xhigh used to surprise me. Now it's incapable of following the very first instructions. I just hope open source models get as good as last few month's top models before the enshittification has gone too far.

Kimi K2.5 has been great in my experience.

Exactly. Open models are a wrench in monetization plans. If a free model exists, and it’s ad free, then why pay for the proprietary model that comes with ads? It’s a worse product! Presumably you’d just use the better experience at that point

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#269

Post by AbstractH24 »

I still find it mind-boggling that I deleted my ChatGPT account back when that DoD thing happened, and my life has been no different.

Amazing that a few years ago Claude and Gemini didn't exist (one of those was barely useable a year ago even)

Re: OpenAI Has New Focus (on the IPO)

#270

Post by eikenberry »

MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #152
eikenberry wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opposite. Everyone of my friend's companies don't do this. They all work at smaller companies though, which I bet is the difference.

I work at a smaller company that does this.

Weird. I would have thought most smaller companies would not need this sort of useless metric where people know each other and know what they are doing. These things are generally the domain of larger companies where they have already dehumanized their employees and deal only with numbers.
Post reply on HN