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

ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 508 posts

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#371

Post by j_timberlake »

FergusArgyll wrote: post #103
pants2 wrote: post #70

I've been using OpenAI operator for some time - but more and more websites are blocking it, such as LinkedIn and Amazon. That's two key use-cases gone (applying to jobs and online shopping). Operator is pretty low-key, but once Agent starts getting popular, more sites will block it. They'll need to allow a proxy configuration or something like that.

If people will actually pay for stuff (food, clothing, flights, whatever) through this agent or operator, I see no reason Amazon etc would continue to block them.

The AI isn't going notice the latest and greatest hot new deals that are slathered on every page. It's just going to put the thing you asked for in the shopping-cart.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#372

Post by aniforprez »

sebasvisser wrote: post #181
taf2 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the question then is what's the human error rate... We know we're not perfect... So if you're 100% rested and only have to find the edge case bug, maybe you'll usually find it vs you're burned out getting it 98% of the way there and fail to see the 2% of the time bugs... Wording here is tricky to explain but I think what we'll find is this helps us get that much closer... Of course when you spend your time bu…

Would be insane to expect an ai to just match us right…nooooo if it pertains computers/automation/ai it needs to be beyond perfect.

Right? Why are we giving grace to a damn computer as if it's human? How are people defending this? If it's a computer, I don't care how intelligent it is. 98% right is actually unacceptable.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#373

Post by intended »

lobochrome wrote: post #305
Aurornis wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how it normally takes him 4 to 8 hours to put together complicated, data-heavy reports. Now he fires off an agent request, goes to walk his dog, and comes back to a downloadable spreadsheet of dense data, which he pulls up and says "I think it got 98% of the information correct... This is where the AI hype bites people. A great use of AI in this situation would be to automate the collection and checking of data. Se…

“The quip about 98% correct should be a red flag for anyone familiar with spreadsheets” I disagree. Receiving a spreadsheet from a junior means I need to check it. If this gives me infinite additional juniors I’m good. It’s this popular pattern of HN comments - expect AI to behave deterministically correct - while the whole world operates on stochastically correct all the time…

When my life was spreadsheets, we were expected to get to the point of being 99.99% right.

You went from “do it again” to “go check the newbies work”.

To get to that stage your degree of proficiency would be “can make out which font is wrong at a glance.”

You wouldn’t be looking at the sheet, you would be running the model in your head.

That stopped being a stochastic function, with the error rate dropping significantly - to the point that making a mistake had consequences tacked on to it.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#374

Post by fudged71 »

Duanemclemore wrote: post #32
jjcm wrote: post #2

For me the most interesting example on this page is the sticker gif halfway down the page. Up until now, chatbots haven't really affected the real world for me†. This feels like one of the first moments where LLMs will start affecting the physical world. I type a prompt and something shows up at my doorstep. I wonder how much of the world economy will be driven by LLM-based orders in the next 10 years. † yes I'm awar…

It went viral more than a year ago, so maybe you've seen it. On the Ritual Industries instagram, Brian (the guy behind RI) posted a video where he gives voice instruction to his phone assistant, which put the text through chatgpt, which generated openscad code, which was fed to his bambu 3d printer, which successfully printed the object. Voice to Stuff. I don't have ig anymore so I can't post the link, but it's easy…

I did a Voice to Stuff demo in 2013 :)

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#375

Post by wyclif »

mat_b wrote: post #362
enneff wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience the value of junior contributors is that they will one day become senior contributors. Their work as juniors tends to require so much oversight and coaching from seniors that they are a net negative on forward progress in the short term, but the payoff is huge in the long term.

I don't see how this can be true when no one stays at a single job long enough for this to play out. You would simply be training junior employees to become senior employees for someone else.

So this has been a problem in the tech market for a while now. Nobody wants to hire juniors for tech because even at FAANGs the average career trajectory is what, 2-3 years? There's no incentive for companies to spend the time, money, and productivity hit to train juniors properly. When the current cohort ages out, a serious problem is going to occur, and it won't be pretty.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#376

Post by intended »

pbh101 wrote: post #311
prettyblocks wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how well it seems to be going in those specific areas, it seems like it's more of a regulatory issue than a technological one.

This is a big moving of the goalposts. The optimists were saying Level 5 would be purchasable everywhere by ~2018. They aren’t purchasable today, just hail-able. And there’s a lot of remote human intervention. And San Francisco doesn’t get snow.

Hell - SF doesn’t have motorcyclists or any vehicular traffic, driving on the wrong side of the road.

Or cows sharing the thoroughfares.

It should be obvious to all HNers that have lived or travelled to developing / global south regions - driving data is cultural data.

You may as well say that self driving will only happen in countries where the local norms and driving culture is suitable to the task.

A desperately anemic proposition compared to the science fiction ambition.

I’m quietly hoping I’m going to be proven wrong, but we’re better off building trains, than investing in level 5. It’s going to take a coordination architecture owned by a central government to overcome human behavior variance, and make full self driving a reality.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#377

Post by j_timberlake »

dcre wrote: post #65

Very slightly impressed by their emphasis on the gigantic (my word, not theirs) risk of giving the thing access to real creds and sensitive info.

The sane way to do this (if you wanted to) would be to give the AI a debit card with a small balance to work with. If funds get stolen, you know exactly what the maximum damage is. And if you can't afford that damage, then you wouldn't have been able to afford that card to begin with.

But since people can cancel transactions with a credit card, that's what people are going to do, and it will be a huge mess every time.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#378

Post by dml2135 »

imiric wrote: post #262
prettyblocks wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how well it seems to be going in those specific areas, it seems like it's more of a regulatory issue than a technological one.

Ah, those pesky regulations that try to prevent road accidents... If it's not a technological limitation, why aren't we seeing self-driving cars in countries with lax regulations? Mexico, Brazil, India, etc. Tesla launched FSD in Mexico earlier this year, but you would think companies would be jumping at the opportunity to launch in markets with less regulation. So this is largely a technological limitation. They hav…

Do we even know what % of Waymo rides in SF are completely autonomous? I would not be surprised if more of them are remotely piloted than they've let on...

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#379

Post by eitally »

twalkz wrote: post #30

The "spreadsheet" example video is kind of funny: guy talks about how it normally takes him 4 to 8 hours to put together complicated, data-heavy reports. Now he fires off an agent request, goes to walk his dog, and comes back to a downloadable spreadsheet of dense data, which he pulls up and says "I think it got 98% of the information correct... I just needed to copy / paste a few things. If it can do 90 - 95% of the…

Honestly, though, there are far more use cases where 98% correct is equivalent to perfect than situations that require absolute correctness, both in business and for personal use.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#380

Post by wyclif »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #325
prettyblocks wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how well it seems to be going in those specific areas, it seems like it's more of a regulatory issue than a technological one.

Maybe, but it's also going to be a financial issue eventually too My city had Car2Go for a couple of years, but it's gone now. They had to pull out of the region because it wasn't making them enough money I expect Waymo and any other sort of vehicle ridesharing thing will have the same problem in many places

But it seems the reason for that is that this is a new, immature technology. Every new technology goes through that cycle until someone figures out how to make it financially profitable.
Post reply on HN