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

GPT-5.2

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.2

#331

Post by UltraSane »

tenpoundhammer wrote: post #295

I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for curre…

Google has such a huge advantage in the amount of training data with the Google search database and with YouTube and in terms of FLOPS with their TPUs.

Re: GPT-5.2

#333

Post by onraglanroad »

I suppose this is as good a place as any to mention this. I've now met two different devs who complained about the weird responses from their LLM of choice, and it turned out they were using a single session for everything. From recipes for the night, presents for the wife and then into programming issues the next day.

Don't do that. The whole context is sent on queries to the LLM, so start a new chat for each topic. Or you'll start being told what your wife thinks about global variables and how to cook your Go.

I realise this sounds obvious to many people but it clearly wasn't to those guys so maybe it's not!

Re: GPT-5.2

#334

Post by ACCount37 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #193
HDThoreaun wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arc-AGI is just an iq test. I don’t see the problem with training it to be good at iq tests because that’s a skill that translates well.

Exactly. In principle, at least, the only way to overfit to Arc-AGI is to actually be that smart. Edit: if you disagree, try actually TAKING the Arc-AGI 2 test, then post.

With this kind of thing, the tails ALWAYS come apart, in the end. They come apart later for more robust tests, but "later" isn't "never", far from it.

Having a high IQ helps a lot in chess. But there's a considerable "non-IQ" component in chess too.

Let's assume "all metrics are perfect" for now. Then, when you score people by "chess performance"? You wouldn't see the people with the highest intelligence ever at the top. You'd get people with pretty high intelligence, but extremely, hilariously strong chess-specific skills. The tails came apart.

Same goes for things like ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2. It's an interesting metric (isomorphic to the progressive matrix test? usable for measuring human IQ perhaps?), but no metric is perfect - and ARC-AGI is biased heavily towards spatial reasoning specifically.

Re: GPT-5.2

#335

Post by mnky9800n »

solarkraft wrote: post #306
tenpoundhammer wrote: post #295

I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for curre…

> Only downsides are in the polish department What an understatement. It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily. Just today it spontaneously lost an entire 20-30 minutes long thread and it was far from the first time. It basically does it any time you interrupt it in any way. It’s straight up data loss. It’s kind of a typical Google product in that it feels more like a tech demo than a product. It has theoreti…

The colab integration is where it shines the most imo.

Re: GPT-5.2

#336

Post by keeeba »

Doesn’t seem like this will be SOTA in things that really matter, hoping enough people jump to it that Opus has more lenient usage limits for a while

Re: GPT-5.2

#337

Post by radicaldreamer »

solarkraft wrote: post #306
tenpoundhammer wrote: post #295

I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for curre…

> Only downsides are in the polish department What an understatement. It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily. Just today it spontaneously lost an entire 20-30 minutes long thread and it was far from the first time. It basically does it any time you interrupt it in any way. It’s straight up data loss. It’s kind of a typical Google product in that it feels more like a tech demo than a product. It has theoreti…

Google’s standard problem is that they don’t even use their own products. Their Pixel and Android team rocks iPhones on the daily, for example.

Re: GPT-5.2

#338

Post by MagicMoonlight »

jumploops wrote: post #117

> “a new knowledge cutoff of August 2025” This (and the price increase) points to a new pretrained model under-the-hood. GPT-5.1, in contrast, was allegedly using the same pretraining as GPT-4o.

No, they just feed in another round of slop to the same model.

Re: GPT-5.2

#339

Post by w_for_wumbo »

Does anyone else consider that maybe it's impossible to benchmark the performance of a piece of paper.

This is a tool that allows an intelligent system to work with it, the same way that a piece of paper can reflect the writers' intelligence, how can we accurately judge the performance of the piece of paper, when it is so intimately reliant on the intelligence that is working with it?

Re: GPT-5.2

#340

Post by IAmNotACellist »

koolba wrote: post #245
IAmNotACellist wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they care so much? They're a non-profit dedicated to the betterment of humanity via open access to AI. They have nothing to hide. They have no motivation to lie, or lie by omission.

> Why do they care so much? They're a non-profit dedicated to the betterment of humanity via open access to AI. We're still talking about OpenAI right?

You're not calling Sam Altman a liar, are you?
Post reply on HN