The flow reminds me a bit of undermind.ai.
Introducing deep research
291–300 of 445 posts
Re: Introducing deep research
#292Feels more and more like openAI doesn't have "that next big thing".
To be clear I'm constantly impressed with what they have and what I get as a customer, but the delivery since 4 hasn't exactly been in line with Altman's Musk-tier vapoware promises...
Re: Introducing deep research
#293For “deep research” I’m also reading “getting the answers right”.
Most people I talk to are at the point now where getting completely incorrect answers 10% of the time — either obviously wrong from common sense, or because the answers are self contradictory — undermines a lot of trust in any kind of interaction. Other than double checking something you already know, language models aren’t large enough to actually know everything. They can only sound like they do.
What I’m looking for is therefore not just the correct answer, but the correct answer in an amount of time that’s faster than it would take me to research the answer myself, and also faster than it takes me to verify the answer given by the machine.
It’s one thing to ask a pupil to answer an exam paper to which you know the answers. It’s a whole next level to have it answer questions to which you don’t know the answers, and on whose answers you are relying to be correct.
Re: Introducing deep research
#294Gemini has had this for a month or two, also named "Deep Research" https://blog.google/products/gemini/google-gemini-deep-resea... Meta question: what's with all of the naming overlap in the AI world? Triton (Nvidia, OpenAI) and Gro{k,q} (X.ai, groq, OpenAI) all come to mind
John Stewart had something to say about this: https://youtu.be/Byg8VZdKK88?si=pX1WbtRwZCBGpwHS&t=141
Without the tracking bits: https://youtu.be/Byg8VZdKK88#t=141
Re: Introducing deep research
#295isn't this just perplexity?
Re: Introducing deep research
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
they explicitly stated it in the launch
The linked article says, > Powered by a version of the upcoming OpenAI o3 model that’s optimized for web browsing and data analysis, it leverages reasoning to search, interpret, and analyze massive amounts of text, images, and PDFs on the internet, pivoting as needed in reaction to information it encounters. If that's what you're referring to, then it doesn't seem that "explicit" to me. For example, how do we know th…
o3-mini is not really "a version of the o3 model", it is a different model (less parameters). So their language strongly suggests, imo, that Deep Research is powered by a model with the same number of parameters as o3.
Re: Introducing deep research
#297So much cynicism and hate in these comments, especially as we are likely witnessing AGI come to life. Its still early, but it might be coming. Where is the excitement? This is an interesting time to be alive. HN has a huge cultural problem that makes this website almost irrelevant. All the interesting takes have moved to X/twitter
AGI aside, sometimes HN critics/cynicism indeed points out the exact reason why something wouldn't work and is vindicated after the fact, e.g. Apple Vision Pro. I guess it's just hard to predict the future and for me, it's interesting to listen to even pure contrarians.
Re: Introducing deep research
#298Ok so I do this as a noob in some field. How do I know or trust the research conclusions? How do I know it’s not hallucinated its conclusions? I’ll likely have to do my own research to just verify it and then if I did I might as well have done the research myself.
Re: Introducing deep research
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is one of the actual questions: > In Greek mythology, who was Jason's maternal great-grandfather? https://www.google.com/search?q=In+Greek+mythology%2C+who+wa...
No it is not an actual question on this exam. From the paper: “To ensure question quality and integrity, we enforce strict submission criteria. Questions should be precise, unambiguous, solvable, and non-searchable , ensuring models cannot rely on memorization or simple retrieval methods. All submissions must be original work or non-trivial syntheses of published information, though contributions from unpublished res…
I am selling a bridge, it is a great bargain.
Re: Introducing deep research
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
Either you care about being correct or you don't. If you don't care then it doesn't matter whether you made it up or the AI did. If you care then you'll fact check before publishing. I don't see why this changes.
It's possible that you care, but the person next to you doesn't, and external pressures force you to keep up with the person who's willing to shovel AI slop. Most of us don't have a complete luxury of the moral high ground at our jobs.
It's the high reps fault then of not caring about quality. Either you assimilate in that low quality lower management using AI slop or change job.