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

461–470 of 508 posts

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#461

Post by bachittle »

htrp wrote: post #247
bredren wrote: post #236

This solves a big issue for existing CLI agents, which is session persistence for users working from their own machines. With claude code, you usually start it from your own local terminal. Then you have access to all the code bases and other context you need and can provide that to the AI. But when you shut your laptop, or have network availability changes the show stops. I've solved this somewhat on MacOS using the…

Run dev on an actual server somewhere that doesn't shut down

The free tier of Oracle Cloud is plenty enough here to spin up a VM that can run indefinitely. It also has pretty good specs too.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#462

Post by dortlick »

zer00eyz wrote: post #356
ameliaquining wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Gartner hype cycle assumes a single fundamental technical breakthrough, and describes the process of the market figuring out what it is and isn't good for. This isn't straightforwardly applicable to LLMs because the question of what they're good for is a moving target; the foundation models are actually getting more capable every few months, which wasn't true of cryptocurrency or self-driving cars. At least some…

> or if it has, it's too recent to be visible yet It's very visible. Silicon Valley, and VC money has a proven formula. Bet on founders and their ideas, deliver them and get rich. Everyone knows the game, we all get it. Thats how things were going till recently. Then FB came in and threw money at people and they all jumped ship. Google did the same. These are two companies famous for throwing money at things (Oculus,…

It doesn't have to be "or". It's entirely possible that AI researchers both believe AI breakthroughs are coming and also act in their own financial self interest by taking a lucrative job offer.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#463

Post by cma »

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.

> They'll need to allow a proxy configuration or something like that.

You could host a VNC webview to another desktop with a good IP

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#464

Post by dortlick »

ishita159 wrote: post #114
dingnuts wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The critics of the current AI buzz certainly have been drawing comparisons to self driving cars as LLMs inch along with their logarithmic curve of improvement that's been clear since the GPT-2 days. Whenever someone tells me how these models are going to make white collar professions obsolete in five years, I remind them that the people making these predictions 1) said we'd have self driving cars "in a few years" bac…

I think people don't realize how much models have to extrapolate still, which causes hallucinations. We are still not great at giving all the context in our brain to LLMs. There's still a lot of tooling to be built before it can start completely replacing anyone.

It doesn't have to "completely" replace any individual employee to be impactful. If you have 50 coders that each use AI to boost their productivity by 10%, you need 5 fewer coders. It doesn't require that AI is able to handle 100% of any individual person's job.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#465

Post by slg »

psychoslave wrote: post #397
slg wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proper use of these systems is to treat them like an intern or new grad hire. You can give them the work that none of the mid-tier or senior people want to do, thereby speeding up the team. But you will have to review their work thoroughly because there is a good chance they have no idea what they are actually doing. If you give them mission-critical work that demands accuracy or just let them have free rein with…

What a awful way to think about internship. The goal is to help people grow, so they can achieve things they would not have been able to deal with before gaining that additional experience. This might include boring dirty work, yes. But that means they thus prove they can overcome such a struggle, and so more experienced people should be expected to also be able to go though it - if there is no obvious more pleasant…

>The goal is to help people grow, so they can achieve things they would not have been able to deal with before gaining that additional experience.

You and others seem to be disagreeing with something I never said. This is 100% compatible with what I said. You don't just review and then silently correct an interns work behind their back, the review process is part of the teaching. That doesn't really work with AI, so it wasn't explicitly part of my analogy.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#466

Post by nathan_douglas »

wyclif wrote: post #375
mat_b wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It seems there's a distinct lack of enthusiasm for hiring people who've exceeded that 2-3 year tenure at any given place, too. Maintaining a codebase through its lifecycle seems often to be seen as a sign of complacency.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#467

Post by anentropic »

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…

yes... and arguably the last 5% is harder now because you didn't spend the time yourself to get to that point so you're not really 'up to speed' on what has been produced so far

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#468

Post by Fraterkes »

chaos_emergent wrote: post #440
Fraterkes wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your point? We’re talking about the ai 2027 predictions here, which were made 4 months ago. 4 is “checks notes” less than 7

the point is that minimizing 4 months as an insufficient timeline along which to prove out ones ability to predict a sequence of events is dumb when the rate of progress is incredibly fast.

You're calling me dumb? Kind of rude

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#469

Post by ytpete »

dml2135 wrote: post #378
imiric wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

My understanding is they don't have the capability to have a ride be flat-out remotely piloted in real time. If the car gets stuck and puts its hazards on, a human can intervene, look at the 360 view from the cameras, and then give the car a simple high-level instruction like "turn left here" or "it's safe to proceed straight." But they can't directly drive the car continuously.

And those moments where the car gives up and waits for async assistance are very obvious to the rider. Most rides in Waymos don't contain any moments like that.

Re: ChatGPT agent: bridging research and action

#470

Post by aerhardt »

achrono wrote: post #134
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.

In typical SV style, this is just to throw it out there and let second order effects build up. At some point I expect OpenAI to simply form a partnership with LinkedIn and Amazon. In fact, I suspect LinkedIn might even create a new tier that you'd have to use if you want to use LinkedIn via OpenAI.

I do data work in domains that are closely related to LinkedIn (sales and recruitment), and let me tell you, the chances that LinkedIn lets any data get out of the platform are very slim.

They have some of the strongest anti-bot measures in the world and they even prosecute companies that develop browser extensions for manual extraction. They would prevent people from writing LinkedIn info with pen and paper, if they could. Their APIs are super-rudimentary and they haven't innovated in ages. Their CRM integrations for their paid products (ex: Sales Nav) barely allow you to save info into the CRM and instead opt for iframe style widgets inside your CRM so that data remains within their moat.

Unless you show me how their incentives radically change (ex: they can make tons of money while not sacrificing any other strategic advantage), I will continue to place a strong bet on them being super defensive about data exfiltration.

Post reply on HN