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

GPT-4.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4.5

#361

Post by mandevil »

crazygringo wrote: post #258
swatcoder wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We look forward to learning more about its strengths, capabilities, and potential applications in real-world settings. If GPT‑4.5 delivers unique value for your use case, your feedback (opens in a new window) will play an important role in guiding our decision. "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If…

> We don't really know what this is good for Oh come on. Think how long of a gap there was between the first microcomputer and VisiCalc. Or between the start of the internet and social networking. First of all, it's going to take us 10 years to figure out how to use LLM's to their full productive potential. And second of all, it's going to take us collectively a long time to also figure out how much accuracy is neces…

ChatGPT had its initial public release November 30th, 2022. That's 820 days to today. The Apple II was first sold June 10, 1977, and Visicalc was first sold October 17, 1979, which is 859 days. So we're right about the same distance in time- the exact equal duration will be April 7th of this year.

Going back to the very first commercially available microcomputer, the Altair 8800 (which is not a great match, since that was sold as a kit with binary stitches, 1 byte at a time, for input, much more primitive than ChatGPT's UX), that's four years and nine months to Visicalc release. This isn't a decade long process of figuring things out, it actually tends to move real fast.

Re: GPT-4.5

#362

Post by fzzzy »

joshuamcginnis wrote: post #82

I'm one week in on heavy grok usage. I didn't think I'd say this, but for personal use, I'm considering cancelling my OpenAI plan. The one thing I wish grok had was more separation of the UI from X itself. The interface being so coupled to X puts me off and makes it feel like a second-hand citizen. I like ChatGPTs minimalist UI.

Don't they have a standalone Grok app now? I thought I saw that. [edit] ah some sibling comments mention this as well

Re: GPT-4.5

#363

Post by lechatonnoir »

justspacethings wrote: post #337
jodrellblank wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Early testing shows that interacting with GPT‑4.5 feels more natural. Its broader knowledge base, improved ability to follow user intent, and greater “EQ” make it useful for tasks like improving writing, programming, and solving practical problems. We also expect it to hallucinate less." "Early testing doesn't show that it hallucinates less, but we expect that putting that sentence nearby will lead you to draw a c…

The usage of "greater" is also interesting. It's like they are trying to say better, but greater is a geographic term and doesn't mean "better" instead it's closer to "wider" or "covers more area."

I'm all for skepticism of capabilities and cynicism about corporate messaging, but I really don't think there's an interpretation of the word "greater" in this context" that doesn't mean "higher" and "better".

Re: GPT-4.5

#364

Post by ChiefNotAClue »

jampa wrote: post #167

First impression of GPT-4.5: 1. It is very very slow, for some applications where you want real time interactions is just not viable, the text attached below took 7s to generate with 4o, but 46s with GPT4.5 2. The style it writes is way better: it keeps the tone you ask and makes better improvements on the flow. One of my biggest complaints with 4o is that you want for your content to be more casual and accessible bu…

Right side, by a large margin. Better word choice and more natural flow. It feels a lot more human.

Re: GPT-4.5

#365

Post by FpUser »

fsndz wrote: post #274
swatcoder wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We look forward to learning more about its strengths, capabilities, and potential applications in real-world settings. If GPT‑4.5 delivers unique value for your use case, your feedback (opens in a new window) will play an important role in guiding our decision. "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If…

it's so over, pretraining is ngmi. maybe sam Altman was wrong after all ? https://www.lycee.ai/blog/why-sam-altman-is-wrong

>"I also agree with researchers like Yann LeCun or François Chollet that deep learning doesn't allow models to generalize properly to out-of-distribution data—and that is precisely what we need to build artificial general intelligence."

I think "generalize properly to out-of-distribution data" is too weak of criteria for general intelligence (GI). GI model should be able to get interested about some particular area, research all the known facts, derive new knowledge / create theories based upon said fact. If there is not enough of those to be conclusive: propose and conduct experiments and use the results to prove / disprove / improve theories. And it should be doing this constantly in real time on bazillion of "ideas". Basically model our whole society. Fat chance of anything like this happening in foreseeable future.

Re: GPT-4.5

#366

Post by resource0x »

wewewedxfgdf wrote: post #106

I feel like OpenAI is pursuing AGI when Anthropic/Claude is pursuing making AI awesome for practical things like coding. I only ever using OpenAI's coding now as a double check against Claude. Does OpenAI have their eyes on the ball?

Pursuing AGI? What method do they use to pursue something that no one knows what it is? They will keep saying they are pursuing AGI as long as there's a buyer for their BS.

Re: GPT-4.5

#367

Post by Manouchehri »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #329
zaptrem wrote: post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

The price is obviously 15-30x that of 4o, but I'd just posit that there are some use cases where it may make sense. It probably doesn't make sense for the "open-ended consumer facing chatbot" use case, but for other use cases that are fewer and higher value in nature, it could if it's abilities are considerably better than 4o. For example, there are now a bunch of vendors that sell "respond to RFP" AI products. The n…

Yeah, agreed.

We’re one of those types of customers. We wrote an OpenAI API compatible gateway that automatically batches stuff for us, so we get 50% off for basically no extra dev work in our client applications.

I don’t care about speed, I care about getting the right answer. The cost is fine as long as the output generates us more profit.

Re: GPT-4.5

#368

Post by SkyPuncher »

i_love_retros wrote: post #244

Anyone really finding ai useful for coding? I'm finding it to make things up, get things wrong, ignore things I ask. Def not worried about losing my job to it.

Yes, massively.

There’s a learning curve to it, but it’s worth literally every penny I spend on API calls.

At worst, I’m no faster. At best, it’s easily a 10x improvement.

For me, one of the biggest benefits is talking about coding in natural language. It lowers my mental low and keeps me in a mental space where I’m more easily able to communicate with stakeholders holders.

Re: GPT-4.5

#369

Post by djhworld »

simonw wrote: post #342

I got gpt-4.5-preview to summarize this discussion thread so far (at 324 comments): hn-summary.sh 43197872 -m gpt-4.5-preview Using this script: https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/claude-hacker-news-themes... Here's the result: https://gist.github.com/simonw/5e9f5e94ac8840f698c280293d399... It took 25797 input tokens and 1225 input tokens, for a total cost (calculated using https://tools.simonwillison.net/llm-prices…

interesting summary but it's hard to gauge whether this is better/worse than just piping the contents into a much cheaper model.

Re: GPT-4.5

#370

Post by MichaelZuo »

jampa wrote: post #360
MichaelZuo wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it compare with o1 and o3 preview?

o3 is okay for text checking but has issues following the prompt correctly, same as o1 and DeepSeek R1, I feel that I need to prompt smaller snippets with them. Here is the o3 vs a new run of the same text in GPT 4.5 https://www.diffchecker.com/ZEUQ92u7/

Thanks, though it says o1 on the page, is that a typo?
Post reply on HN