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

The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

blog.charliemeyer.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 97 posts

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#41

Post by gtirloni »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #27
hodgehog11 wrote: post #7

Yes, GPT-5 is more of an iteration than anything else, and to me this says more about OpenAI than the rest of the industry. However, I think the majority of the improvements over the past year have been difficult to quantify using benchmarks. Users often talk about how certain models "feel" smarter on their particular tasks, and we won't know if the same is true for GPT-5 until people use it for a while. The "GPT-5 w…

> Do we really want to replace humans? Unfortunately for a substantial number of people the answer to this question seems to be a resounding "yes"

With those people being business owners, investors, etc, 100% of the time.

The other 99% would like automation to make their lives easier. Who wouldn't want the promised tech utopia? Unfortunately, that's not happening so it's understandable that people are more concerned than joyous about AI.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#42

Post by profstasiak »

ndr_ wrote: post #40

Some of the problems with GPT-5 in ChatGPT could actually be due to new model that is in place to route requests to the actual GPT-5 models. There are four models in the GPT-5 family, and I could reproduce the faulty "blueberry" test result only with the "gpt-5-chat" (aka "gpt-5-main") model through the API. This model is there to answer (near) instantly and it falls in the non-thinking category of LLMs. The "blueber…

so can we please stop talking of AGI until counting letter in a word are not hard?

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#43

Post by infecto »

throwfaraway4 wrote: post #14
Havoc wrote: post #6

The messaging is all over the place anyway. Not so long ago OAI was talking about faster iterations and warning people to not expect huge leaps. (A position that makes sense imo). Yet people talk about AGI in a serious manner?

"AGI achieved internally" -- Sam Altman

Yes a quote from a meme post on Reddit. No doubt he has been overselling the future for a while but why use a quote with the wrong context?

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#44

Post by gtirloni »

Havoc wrote: post #6

The messaging is all over the place anyway. Not so long ago OAI was talking about faster iterations and warning people to not expect huge leaps. (A position that makes sense imo). Yet people talk about AGI in a serious manner?

> We are now confident we know how to build AGI as we have traditionally understood it. We believe that, in 2025, we may see the first AI agents "join the workforce" and materially change the output of companies. We continue to believe that iteratively putting great tools in the hands of people leads to great, broadly-distributed outcomes.

"Reflections" by Sam Altman, January 2025 - https://blog.samaltman.com/reflections

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#46

Post by msabalau »

dentemple wrote: post #10
cwrichardkim wrote: post #4

> They admitted that they were, and I am not lying about this, paywalling chat colors . […] This is a feature that a company adds when they are out of ideas This observation + sherlocking cursor suggests that perhaps sherlocking is the ideation strategy. Curious to see if they’re subsidizing token costs specifically to farm and Sherlock ideas

Yeah, I agree with the OP here. After all this time, being able to change the chat colors at this point has some real We-reached-the-bottom-of-the-backlog energy, and they're just now implementing the ideas that weren't considered important enough before by the PMs to consider. It hardly feels like a next generation release. As a related anecdote (not saying that this is industry standard, just pointing out my own ex…

The core product failure here is overhyping incremental improvement, eroding trust.

PMs operating at this level ought to be bringing in some low cost UX improvements alongside major features. That simply isn't a sign that they've run ought of backlog. (That said, it is rather pathetic to paywall this)

A moment's consideration ought to show that Open AI has plenty of significant work they they can be doing, even if the core model never gets any better than this.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#47

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

xnx wrote: post #30
anon191928 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

burning money worked for Uber. As long as they can IPO or get cheap debt from governm friends any valuation can work. Uber lost double digit billions as an app with no edge or anythin. It always made no sense beyond 1 billion

> burning money worked for Uber. TBD. Some people did well while Uber gave money away, but Uber is not net profitable over its lifetime.

The way they do this in Europe is that an enterpreneur buys a fleet of cars and then gets a visa for a number of folks from Bangladesh and other areas who don not own any of these cars and ride them in turns (they also sleep like 10 in one appartment but that's a different story). The owner gets the money and distributes them to the actual drivers. Uber says they are innocent as they are not in an emplyer-employee position with any of these drivers.

This model worked for the fleet owners so far because the Saudi gave enough money so that both (1) the customers were happy, (2) the cash from the ride could be divided between owners and drivers in a way these drivers complained only to a certain extent.

But the last two years (the only profitable ones) are much worse, both for the drivers and fleet owners. There is still sunk cost in there, but once the cars get old enough they will need to think well whether to buy/lease the next batches.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#48

Post by phist_mcgee »

parineum wrote: post #13
phist_mcgee wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet altman talks about AGI being imminent, but his company has only ever produced LLMs.

Now why would the CEO of an AI company say something like that!?

I do know that AGI has a different meaning internally to what we think it means:

https://www.fanaticalfuturist.com/2025/01/microsoft-and-open...

Massive grain of salt though.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#49

Post by sillyfluke »

riku_iki wrote: post #32
anon191928 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

burning money worked for Uber. As long as they can IPO or get cheap debt from governm friends any valuation can work. Uber lost double digit billions as an app with no edge or anythin. It always made no sense beyond 1 billion

Uber had limited underpowered competition, so they could win starvation game. OpenAI competes with google, who can drop 50B/y into AI hype for very long time.

the 1.5 mil bonus to tech staff announcement prior to chatgpt 5 release makes even more sense now. They knew it would be difficult to manage public expectations and wanted to counter the short-term (in the best case) drop in morale in the company.

Re: The GPT-5 Launch Was Concerning

#50

Post by emccue »

infecto wrote: post #39
emccue wrote: post #16

I asked it to make a drawing of the US with every state numbered from biggest to smallest with 1 being the largest. Maine was #89 (That is not a typo.) and Oregon was #1. OpenAI as a company simply cannot exist without a constant influx of investor money. Burning money on every request is not a viable business model. Companies built on OpenAI/Anthropic are similarly deeply unprofitable businesses. OpenAI needs to con…

Isn’t it old news that the full for-profit is not happening and they renegotiated the terms that would make the current proposed PBC a solution as it meets the economic terms? I have no idea if OpenAI succeeds or not but I find arguments like yours difficult to understand. Most businesses are not using these systems to draw a map. Maybe the release of 5 is lackluster but it does not change that there is some value in…

The entire US stock market is propped up by big tech companies spending massively on Data Centers and GPUs for AI. OpenAI is valued higher than Netflix.

A company that can pull in single digit billions in revenue for hundreds of billions in expenses just doesn't make sense.

> Most businesses are not using these systems t̶o̶ ̶d̶r̶a̶w̶ ̶a̶ ̶m̶a̶p̶.̶

FTFY

And no - while it might be obvious from the outside in that it probably won't happen, the continued existence of the business is still predicated on conversion to a for-profit. They don't just need the amount of money they've already "raised", they need too keep getting more money forever.

Post reply on HN