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

301–310 of 330 posts

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#301

Post by discardable_dan »

tedsanders wrote: post #24
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.

Yeah, for a while ChatGPT Plus has been powered by two series of models under the hood. One series is the Instant series, which is faster and more tuned to ChatGPT, but less accurate. The second series is the Thinking series, which is more accurate and more tuned to professional knowledge work, but slower (because it uses more reasoning tokens). We'd also prefer to have simple experience with just one option, but pic…

How's the war effort?

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#302

Post by soccercerer »

kenjackson wrote: post #200
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…

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 !

[dead]

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#303

Post by soccercerer »

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 —.)

[dead]

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#304

Post by literalAardvark »

appointment wrote: post #233
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 —.)

em-dashes and en-dashes are used for completely different purposes, so why would they be confused?

Because most people are ESL and really don't care.

I didn't even know there are multiple types of dashes.

I did know about multiple types of quotes because they kept breaking code on blogs. Still didn't care, but at least I learned how to spot and fix them.

Really looking forward to having the wrong kind of dash in code, but at least with current tech that seems like it won't happen.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#305

Post by kilroy123 »

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…

https://thingsaisay.com/

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#306

Post by bengale »

hungryhobbit wrote: post #150
ibejoeb wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was there a recent archery incident?

OpenAI just took a major US military contract from Anthropic because Anthropic had morals and wouldn't let the US military use Claude to surveil or attack US citizens ... ... and OpenAI didn't. The military said (effectively) "we need to be able to use AI illegally against our own citizens", and OpenAI said "we'll help!"

Or OpenAI decided to allow democratically elected leaders to make defence decisions rather than have some corporatocracy to step in and start deciding what actions are moral.

Even if you agree with Anthropic's moral stance I would hope people could see that allowing corporations to take on a role like that is a dangerous path.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#307

Post by leokennis »

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…

At least in the ChatGPT app, you can set some "personality" traits. Like the style (more or les warm or enthusiastic, use more or less lists and emojis) and the tone.

I have mine set to efficient, using less warmth, less enthusiasm, less headers and lists and less emoji's. Combined with sensible personal instructions (don't placate me, don't flatter me, be professional, tell me if I'm wrong, tell me if you don't know etc.), I see none of the "that's not crazy, that's commitment!" or "here is the no-frills rundown" BS.

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#308

Post by rainmaking »

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…

Do you feel Claude does better on this?

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#309

Post by MetalSnake »

smusamashah wrote: post #272
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…

This could be the reason https://petergpt.github.io/bullshit-benchmark/viewer/index.v... Claude bullshits the least of all models. ChatGPT does it more than half the time.

I'm surprised that Opus 4.5 is better than Opus 4.6 and Sonnet 4.6 is even better than Opus 4.5 (and 4.6). Shouldn't Opus 4.6 be the best of the Claude models?

Re: GPT‑5.3 Instant

#310

Post by theshrike79 »

rainmaking wrote: post #308
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…

Do you feel Claude does better on this?

Yes.

Claude feels more like an equal, a coworker. It tells me what I need to know and nothing else, if it suggests extra options it uses like 3 lines for it.

ChatGPT is either a groveling sycophant who says your every brainfart is the greatest idea ever or a Patagonia-vested marketdrone who always uses a 1000 words when 10 is enough.

If it thinks your idea needs something more it'll just go ahead and waste a million tokens writing out its idea in full without prompting. Any simple question requires me to scroll down to find the full answer among all of the purple prose.

Post reply on HN