Live data from Hacker News

The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

blog.charliemeyer.co

31–40 of 97 posts

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#31
post #21

Am I right to say that "AGI" was just...cancelled again? Did we just get scammed right in front of our eyes with an overhyped release and what is now an underwhelming model if the point was that GPT-5 was supposed to be trustworthy enough for serious use-cases and it can't even count or reason about letters? So much for the "AGI has been achieved internally" nonsense with the VCs and paid shills on X/Twitter bullshit…

How were you still eating that?

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#32
post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

burning money worked for Uber. As long as they can IPO or get cheap debt from governm friends any valuation can work. Uber lost double digit billions as an app with no edge or anythin. It always made no sense beyond 1 billion

Uber had limited underpowered competition, so they could win starvation game.

OpenAI competes with google, who can drop 50B/y into AI hype for very long time.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#33
post #21

Am I right to say that "AGI" was just...cancelled again? Did we just get scammed right in front of our eyes with an overhyped release and what is now an underwhelming model if the point was that GPT-5 was supposed to be trustworthy enough for serious use-cases and it can't even count or reason about letters? So much for the "AGI has been achieved internally" nonsense with the VCs and paid shills on X/Twitter bullshit…

Not only "AGI" is cancelled but they also sort of admitted that so-called "scaling" "laws" don't work anymore. Scaling inference kinda still works, but obviously is bounded by context size and haystack-and-needle diminishing accuracy. So the promise of even steadily moving towards AGI is dubious at best.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#34
post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

Does it get the non-drawing written text list version right at least?

It regurgitates the list in text form, which is almost certainly in the training data.

But this company is valued more than Netflix. The bar should not be this low.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#35
post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

I had it create a map "in the style of a history textbook." It came up with something that looks worse than I imagined: https://pasteboard.co/3zGy5ti4hHuT.jpg

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#36
post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

burning money worked for Uber. As long as they can IPO or get cheap debt from governm friends any valuation can work. Uber lost double digit billions as an app with no edge or anythin. It always made no sense beyond 1 billion

"...while Uber has achieved profitability, some analyses suggest that a substantial portion of these profits may come from an increased revenue share at the expense of drivers' earnings".

So let's imagine is 2040 and OpenAI is finally profitable. Now, Uber did this by increasing prices, firing some staff and paying smaller wages to drivers. And all this while having near-monopoly in certain areas. What realistic measures would they need to take in order to compete with, say, Google? Because I just wish them good luck with that.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#37
post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

burning money worked for Uber. As long as they can IPO or get cheap debt from governm friends any valuation can work. Uber lost double digit billions as an app with no edge or anythin. It always made no sense beyond 1 billion

> no edge or anythin

I wouldn't say they had no edge. They had a huge advantage over traditional taxi companies. You can argue that a local Uber-like app could be easily implemented, that's where the investors came in to flood the markets and ensure other couldn't compete easily.

The situation is in no way similar to OpenAI's. OpenAI truly has no edge over Anthropic and others. AGI is not magically emerging from LLM's and they don't seem to have an alternative (nobody does but they promised it and got the big bucks so now it's their problem).

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#38
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it get the non-drawing written text list version right at least?

It regurgitates the list in text form, which is almost certainly in the training data. But this company is valued more than Netflix. The bar should not be this low.

Yeah, I was just curious how deep the abyss was in this instance.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#39
post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

Isn’t it old news that the full for-profit is not happening and they renegotiated the terms that would make the current proposed PBC a solution as it meets the economic terms?

I have no idea if OpenAI succeeds or not but I find arguments like yours difficult to understand. Most businesses are not using these systems to draw a map. Maybe the release of 5 is lackluster but it does not change that there is some value in these tools today and ignoring R&D (which is definitely a huge cost) they run at a profit.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#40
Some of the problems with GPT-5 in ChatGPT could actually be due to new model that is in place to route requests to the actual GPT-5 models. There are four models in the GPT-5 family, and I could reproduce the faulty "blueberry" test result only with the "gpt-5-chat" (aka "gpt-5-main") model through the API. This model is there to answer (near) instantly and it falls in the non-thinking category of LLMs. The "blueberry" test represents what they are particularly bad at (and what OpenAI set out to solve with o1). The other thinking models in the family, including gpt-5-nano, solve this correctly.
Post reply on HN