Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5

openai.com

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5

#371
post #135

"With ChatGPT-5, the response feels less like AI and more like you're chatting with your high-IQ and -EQ friend." Is that a good thing?

To them, and for optimizing for user engagement, it probably is... The future product direction for these is looking more, not less syncophatntic

Re: GPT-5

#372

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

Perhaps it is not possible to simulate higher-level intelligence using a stochastic model for predicting text. I am not an AI researcher, but I have friends who do work in the field, and they are not worried about LLM-based AGI because of the diminishing returns on results vs amount of training data required. Maybe this is the bottleneck. Human intelligence is markedly different from LLMs: it requires far fewer examp…

What are the AI/ML/SL applications that could be more impactful than artificial general intelligence?

Re: GPT-5

#374

ChatGPT5 in this demo: > For an airplane wing (airfoil), the top surface is curved and the bottom is flatter. When the wing moves forward: > * Air over the top has to travel farther in the same amount of time -> it moves faster -> pressure on the top decreases. > * Air underneath moves slower -> pressure underneath is higher > * The presure difference creates an upward force - lift Isn't that explanation of why wings…

From Wikipedia

>In fact, theory predicts – and experiments confirm – that the air traverses the top surface of a body experiencing lift in a shorter time than it traverses the bottom surface; the explanation based on equal transit time is false.

So the effect is greater than equal time transit.

I've seen the GPT5 explanation in GCSE level textbooks but I thought it was supposed to be PhD level;)

Re: GPT-5

#375

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

[deleted]

Re: GPT-5

#376

GPT-5 knowledge cutoff: Sep 30, 2024 (10 months before release). Compare that to Gemini 2.5 Pro knowledge cutoff: Jan 2025 (3 months before release) Claude Opus 4.1: knowledge cutoff: Mar 2025 (4 months before release) https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/compare https://deepmind.google/models/gemini/pro/ https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/about-claude/models/overv...

That could means OpenAI does not take any shortcuts when it comes to safety.

Re: GPT-5

#377
post #268

Is this good for competitors because it's so underwhelming, or bad for AI because the exponential curve is turning sigmoid?

Good for competitors because openai isn’t making a big jump

Re: GPT-5

#378
Very generic, broad and bland presentation. Doesn't seem to have any killer features. No video or audio capabilities shown. The coding seems to be on par with Claude 3.7 at best. No mention of MCP which is about the most important thing in AI right now IMO. Not impressed.

Re: GPT-5

#379

ChatGPT5 in this demo: > For an airplane wing (airfoil), the top surface is curved and the bottom is flatter. When the wing moves forward: > * Air over the top has to travel farther in the same amount of time -> it moves faster -> pressure on the top decreases. > * Air underneath moves slower -> pressure underneath is higher > * The presure difference creates an upward force - lift Isn't that explanation of why wings…

yeah that's a great thing to use as LLM demo because it sounds plausible yet it's completely misleading and wrong.
Post reply on HN