Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.4

openai.com

381–390 of 868 posts

Re: GPT-5.4

#381
post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the hell is a "safety score for violence"?

It's making sure AI condemns violence perpetuated by people without power and sanctifies violence of those who have it.

ChatGPT will gladly defend any actions of the 'US government' from my testing.

Re: GPT-5.4

#382
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is extra cost for >272K: > For models with a 1.05M context window (GPT-5.4 and GPT-5.4 pro), prompts with >272K input tokens are priced at 2x input and 1.5x output for the full session for standard, batch, and flex. Taken from https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.4

Wow, that's diametrically the opposite point: the cost is *extra*, not free.

Diametrically opposite to tokens beyond 200K being literally free? As in, you only pay for the first 200K tokens and the remaining 800K cost $0.00?

I don't think that's a fair reading of the original post at all, obviously what they meant by "no cost" was "no increase in the cost".

Re: GPT-5.4

#383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahh, good question. I misunderstood you, apologies. There's no mention of pricing, quotas and so on. Perhaps Codex will still be preferable for coding tasks as it is tailored for it? Maybe it is faster to respond? Just speculation on my part. If it becomes redundant to 5.4, I presume it will be sunset. Or maybe they eventually release a Codex 5.4?

5.3 Codex is $1.75/$14, and 5.4 is $2.50/$15.

There you go. It makes perfect sense to keep it around then.

Re: GPT-5.4

#384
post #195

[flagged]

This is the low quality reddit-style garbage that gets upvoted on HN these days?

What are we supposed to talk about in this thread exactly? The developers of this model are evil. Are we supposed to just write dry comments about benchmarks while OpenAI condones their models being deployed for autonomously killing people?

Yes I'm sure it makes a very nice bicycle SVG. I will be sure to ask the OpenAI killbots for a copy when they arrive at my house.

Re: GPT-5.4

#385
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You are applying a problem which every AI company has, not unique to OpenAI. What about other nation-states making auto-AI robots which kill children, will you still choose to pick out OpenAI specifically? Maybe your concern is too late and dozens of countries already are training their own AIs to do that or worse.

You underestimate my capacity for broad hatred

Re: GPT-5.4

#386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"that lead to a chat bot being used to identify a school for girls as a valid target" Has it been stated authoritatively somewhere that this was an AI-driven mistake? There are myrid ways that mistake could have been made that don't require AI. These kinds of mistakes were certainly made by all kinds of combatants in the pre-AI era.

Do you think anyone is ever going to say this under any circumstances? That Anthropic were right and they were proved right the very next day? Yeah yeah, they probably had a human in the loop, that’s not really the point though.

Targeting and accuracy mistakes happen plenty in wars that aren't assisted by AI. I don't think it's fair to assume that AI had a hand in the bombing of the school without evidence.

Re: GPT-5.4

#387
post #335

What a model mess! OpenAI now has three price points: GPT 5.1, GPT 5.2 and now GPT 5.4. There version numbers jump across different model lines with codex at 5.3, what they now call instant also at 5.3. Anthropic are really the only ones who managed to get this under control: Three models, priced at three different levels. New models are immediately available everywhere. Google essentially only has Preview models! Th…

> What a model mess! OpenAI now has three price points: GPT 5.1, GPT 5.2 and now GPT 5.4.

I don't know, this feels unnecessarily nitpicky to me

It isn't hard to understand that 5.4 > 5.2 > 5.1. It's not hard to understand that the dash-variants have unique properties that you want to look up before selecting.

Especially for a target audience of software engineers skipping a version number is a common occurrence and never questioned.

Re: GPT-5.4

#388

I find it quite funny how this blog post has a big "Ask ChatGPT" box at the bottom. So you might think you could ask a question about the contents of the blog post, so you type the text "summarise this blog post". And it opens a new chat window with the link to the blog post followed by "summarise this blog post". Only to be told "I can't access external URLs directly, but if you can paste the relevant text or descri…

Probably intentional. They don't want open, no-registration endpoints able to trigger the AI into hitting URLs.

Re: GPT-5.4

#389
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is extra cost for >272K: > For models with a 1.05M context window (GPT-5.4 and GPT-5.4 pro), prompts with >272K input tokens are priced at 2x input and 1.5x output for the full session for standard, batch, and flex. Taken from https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.4

Good find, and that's too small a print for comfort.

It's also in the linked article:

> GPT‑5.4 in Codex includes experimental support for the 1M context window. Developers can try this by configuring model_context_window and model_auto_compact_token_limit. Requests that exceed the standard 272K context window count against usage limits at 2x the normal rate.

Post reply on HN