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

GPT-5.2

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.2

#501

Post by mmaunder »

twisterius wrote: post #420
mmaunder wrote: post #405

Weirdly, the blog announcement completely omits the actual new context window size which is 400,000: https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/gpt-5.2 Can I just say !!!!!!!! Hell yeah! Blog post indicates it's also much better at using the full context. Congrats OpenAI team. Huge day for you folks!! Started on Claude Code and like many of you, had that omg CC moment we all had. Then got greedy. Switched over to Codex…

[flagged]

My name is Mark Maunder. Not the fisheries expert. The other one when you google me. I’m 51 and as skeptical as you when it comes to tech. I’m the CTO of a well known cybersecurity company and merely a user of AI.

Since you critiqued my post, allow me to reciprocate: I sense the same deflector shields in you as many others here. I’d suggest embracing these products with a sense of optimism until proven otherwise and I’ve found that path leads to some amazing discoveries and moments where you realize how important and exciting this tech really is. Try out math that is too hard for you or programming languages that are labor intensive or languages that you don’t know. As the GitHub CEO said: this technology lets you increase your ambition.

Re: GPT-5.2

#502

Post by TacticalCoder »

tenpoundhammer wrote: post #295

I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for curre…

Yeah basically the same here. And many people on paid ChatGPT subscription like us noticed just that. Gemini 3 Pro "thinking" is really good.

> Overall, my conclusion is that ChatGPT has lost and won't catch up because of the search integration strength.

I think the biggest issue OpenAI is facing is the numbers: Google is at the moment a near $4 trillion company. They can splurge a near infinite amount of money to win the race.

Google is so big they they created their own TPUs, which is mindboggling.

Which new user is going to willingly pay an OpenAI subscription once he knows that gemini.google.com gives access to a state of the art model? And Google makes sure to remind users who search that they can "continue the discussion" with Gemini.

Maybe the dirty Altman tricks like cornering the entire RAM market can work but I don't see how they can beat Google by playing fair. OpenAI shall need every single dirty trick in the book, including circular funding / shady deals with NVidia to stay relevant vs the behemoth that Google is.

Re: GPT-5.2

#503

Post by johan914 »

A bit off topic: but what's with the ram usage of LLM clients? ChatGPT, google, and Anthropic all use 1+ GB of ram during a long session. Surely they are not running GPT 3 locally?

Re: GPT-5.2

#504

Post by dzhiurgis »

arjie wrote: post #497
solarkraft wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only downsides are in the polish department What an understatement. It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily. Just today it spontaneously lost an entire 20-30 minutes long thread and it was far from the first time. It basically does it any time you interrupt it in any way. It’s straight up data loss. It’s kind of a typical Google product in that it feels more like a tech demo than a product. It has theoreti…

Any time its safety stuff triggers, Gemini wipes the context. It's unusable because of this because whatever is going on with the safety stuff, it fires too often. I'm trying to figure out some code here, not exactly deporting ICE to Guantanamo or whatever.

On a flip side chatgpt app now has years of history that sometimes useful (search is pretty ok, but could improve) but otherwise I'd like to remove most of it - good luck doing so.

Re: GPT-5.2

#506

Post by AstroBen »

malfist wrote: post #469
AstroBen wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No-one should have the expectation LLMs are giving correct answers 100% of the time. It's inherent to the tech for them to be confidently wrong Code needs to be checked References need to be checked Any facts or claims need to be checked

According to the benchmarks here they're claiming up to 97% accuracy. That ought to be good enough to trust them right? Or maybe these benchmarks are all wrong

Does code work if it's 97% correct?

It's not okay if claims are totally made up 1/30 times

Of course people aren't always correct either, but we're able to operate on levels of confidence. We're also able to weight others' statements as more or less likely to be correct based on what we know about them

Re: GPT-5.2

#507

Post by aaroninsf »

As a popcorn eating bystander it is striking to scan the top comments and find they alternate so dramatically in tone and conclusions.

Re: GPT-5.2

#508

Post by rvnx »

arjie wrote: post #497
solarkraft wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only downsides are in the polish department What an understatement. It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily. Just today it spontaneously lost an entire 20-30 minutes long thread and it was far from the first time. It basically does it any time you interrupt it in any way. It’s straight up data loss. It’s kind of a typical Google product in that it feels more like a tech demo than a product. It has theoreti…

Any time its safety stuff triggers, Gemini wipes the context. It's unusable because of this because whatever is going on with the safety stuff, it fires too often. I'm trying to figure out some code here, not exactly deporting ICE to Guantanamo or whatever.

The more Gemini and Nano-Banana soften their filters, the more audience it will take from other platforms. The main risk is payment providers banning them, I can't imagine bank card providers to remove payments to Google.

Re: GPT-5.2

#509

Post by [deleted] »

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #394
hbarka wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been putting literally the same inputs into both ChatGPT and Gemini and the intuition in answers from Gemini just fits for me. I’m now unwilling to just rely on ChatGPT. Google, if you can find a way to export chats into NotebookLM, that would be even better than the Projects feature of ChatGPT.

All I want for Christmas is a "No NotebookLM slop" checkbox on youtube.

[deleted]

Re: GPT-5.2

#510

Post by gunalx »

energy123 wrote: post #461
lopuhin wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context window size of 400k is not new, gpt-5, 5.1, 5-mini, etc. have the same. But they do claim they improved long context performance which if true would be great.

But 400k was never usable in ChatGPT Plus/Pro subscriptions. It was nerfed down to 60-100k. If you submitted too long of a prompt they deleted the tokens on the end of your prompt before calling the model. Or if the chat got too long (still below 100k however) they deleted your first messages. This was 3 months ago. Can someone with an active sub check whether we can submit a full 400k prompt (or at least 200k) and t…

API use was not merged in this way.
Post reply on HN