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

GPT-5.4

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 868 posts

Re: GPT-5.4

#401

Post by metalliqaz »

L-four wrote: post #370
strongpigeon wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google essentially only has Preview models! The last GA is 2.5. As a developer, I can either use an outdated model or have zero insurances that the model doesn't get discontinued within weeks. What's funny is that there is this common meme at Google: you can either use the old, unmaintained tool that's used everywhere, or the new beta tools that doesn't quite do what you want. Not quite the same, but it did remind…

Gmail was in beta for 5 years, until 2009.

"Gemini, translate 'beta' from Googlespeak to English."

"Ok, here is the translation:"

    'we don't want to offer support'

Re: GPT-5.4

#402

Post by braebo »

earth2mars wrote: post #180
ipsum2 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The model was released less than an hour ago, and somehow you've been able to form such a strong opinion about it. Impressive!

I am actually super impressed with Codex-5.3 extra high reasoning. Its a drop in replacement (infact better than Claude Opus 4.6. lately claude being super verbose going in circles in getting things resolved). I stopped using claude mostly and having a blast with Codex 5.3. looking forward to 5.4 in codex.

I struggle to believe this. Codex can’t hold a candle to Claude on any task I’ve given it.

Re: GPT-5.4

#403

Post by satvikpendem »

CryZe wrote: post #398
satvikpendem wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same, it also helps that it's way cheaper than Opus in VSCode Copilot, where OpenAI models are counted as 1x requests while Opus is 3x, for similar performance (no doubt Microsoft is subsidizing OpenAI models due to their partnership).

I've been using both Opus 4.6 and Codex 5.3 in VSCode's Copilot and while Opus is indeed 3x and Codex is 1x, that doesn't seem to matter as Opus is willing to go work in the background for like an hour for 3 credits, whereas Codex asks you whether to continue every few lines of code it changes, quickly eating way more credits than Opus. In fact Opus in Copilot is probably underpriced, as it can definitely work for an…

That shouldn't really make a difference because you can just prompt Codex to behave the same way, having it load a big list of todo items perhaps from a markdown file and asking it to iterate until it's finished without asking for confirmation, and that'll still cost 1x over Opus' 3x.

Re: GPT-5.4

#404

Post by embedding-shape »

jazzypants wrote: post #396
Aurornis wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

But, why include the non-functional chat box in the article?

Different team "manages" the overall blog than the team who wrote that specific article. At one point, maybe it made sense, then something in the product changed, team that manages the blog never tested it again.

Or, people just stopped thinking about any sort of UX. These sort of mistakes are all over the place, on literally all web properties, some UX flows just ends with you at a page where nothing works sometimes. Everything is just perpetually "a bit broken" seemingly everywhere I go, not specific to OpenAI or even the internet.

Re: GPT-5.4

#405

Post by 0xffff2 »

murat124 wrote: post #258
skrebbel wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I asked an AI. I thought they would know. What the hell is a "safety score for violence"? A “safety score for violence” is usually a risk rating used by platforms, AI systems, or moderation tools to estimate how likely a piece of content is to involve or promote violence. It’s not a universal standard—different companies use their own versions—but the idea is similar everywhere. What it measures A safety score typica…

I still can't tell which direction this score goes... Does a decreasing score mean it is "less safe" (i.e. "more violent") or does it mean it is "less violent" (i.e. "more safe")?

Re: GPT-5.4

#406

Post by CobrastanJorji »

__jl__ wrote: 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…

> Google essentially only has Preview models.

It's really nice to see Google get back to its roots by launching things only to "beta" and then leaving them there for years. Gmail was "beta" for at least five years, I think.

Re: GPT-5.4

#409

Post by cyanydeez »

strongpigeon wrote: post #344
__jl__ wrote: 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…

> Google essentially only has Preview models! The last GA is 2.5. As a developer, I can either use an outdated model or have zero insurances that the model doesn't get discontinued within weeks. What's funny is that there is this common meme at Google: you can either use the old, unmaintained tool that's used everywhere, or the new beta tools that doesn't quite do what you want. Not quite the same, but it did remind…

The business models of LLMs don't include any garuntee, and some how that's fine for a burgeoning decade of trillions of dollars of consumption.

Sure, makes total sense guys.

Post reply on HN