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

521–530 of 868 posts

Re: GPT-5.4

#521

Post by thejohnconway »

observationist wrote: post #186
baq wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini 3.1 slaps all other models at subtle concurrency bugs, sql and js security hardening when reviewing . (Obviously haven’t tested gpt 5.4 yet.) It’s a required step for me at this point to run any and all backend changes through Gemini 3.1 pro.

I have a few standard problems I throw at AI to see if they can solve them cleanly, like visualizing a neural network, then sorting each neuron in each layer by synaptic weights, largest to smallest, correctly reordering any previous and subsequent connected neurons such that the network function remains exactly the same. You should end up with the last layer ordered largest to smallest, and prior layers shuffled acc…

Lol, I’ve had cutting edge models suggest I make an inflexible hole bigger by putting shim in it, and argue their case stubbornly. I don’t know what you’re using to suggest they are anywhere near solving your problem there!

Re: GPT-5.4

#522

Post by peab »

Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #374

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…

LOL - yes Sam, AGI is near indeed. (sarcasm)

Re: GPT-5.4

#523

Post by abustamam »

baxtr wrote: post #478
Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #374

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…

I picked up Claude today after being away and using only ChatGPT and Gemini for a while. I was pretty impressed with how they’ve improved user experience. If I had to guess, I’d say Anthropic has better product people who put more attention to detail in these areas.

I agree! I recently migrated from ChatGPT to Claude and it is just superior in every way. It doesn't blather on the at the end ask me for clarification. It's succinct and clarifies vital information before providing a solution.

Re: GPT-5.4

#524

Post by peab »

fhrow4484 wrote: post #360
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…

https://static0.anpoimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/...

such a great meme

Re: GPT-5.4

#525

Post by LordDragonfang »

bartread wrote: post #512
pocksuppet wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most AI integration is like this. It's not about building working products --- it's about bragging that you put a chatbox in your program.

This is such a stale take. In the past 3 years I’ve worked on multiple products with AI at their core, not as some add-on. Just because the corpo-land dullards[0] can’t execute on anything more complex than shoehorning a chatbot into their offerings doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of people and companies doing far more interesting things. [0] In this case, and with heavy irony, including OpenAI, although it sounds l…

I mean, to be fair, both things can be technically true. There can be lots of interesting things being done, even while most can be low-effort garbage.

But this is just Sturgeon's Law (ninety percent of everything is crap), not an actually insightful addition to the discussion, and I very much agree it's a stale take.

Re: GPT-5.4

#526

Post by abustamam »

bartread wrote: post #512
pocksuppet wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most AI integration is like this. It's not about building working products --- it's about bragging that you put a chatbox in your program.

This is such a stale take. In the past 3 years I’ve worked on multiple products with AI at their core, not as some add-on. Just because the corpo-land dullards[0] can’t execute on anything more complex than shoehorning a chatbot into their offerings doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of people and companies doing far more interesting things. [0] In this case, and with heavy irony, including OpenAI, although it sounds l…

Kinda reminds me of crypto. There are certainly very interesting things happening in the crypto space. But the most visible parts of the crypto universe are the stupid parts (buying PNGs for millions, for example)

Re: GPT-5.4

#527

Post by abustamam »

__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…

I mean, Google notoriously discontinues even non-beta software, so if your concern is that there's insurance that the model doesn't get discontinued, then you may as well just use whatever you want since GA could also get discontinued.

Re: GPT-5.4

#528

Post by _heitoo »

strongpigeon wrote: post #32

It's interesting that they charge more for the > 200k token window, but the benchmark score seems to go down significantly past that. That's judging from the Long Context benchmark score they posted, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding what that implies.

It makes sense in scenarios where a model needs >200k tokens to answer a single prompt. You're shackled to a single session, and if the model hits compaction limits, it'll get lobotomized and give a shitty answer, so higher limits, even with degraded performance, are still an improvement.

Re: GPT-5.4

#529

Post by martin-t »

Waterluvian wrote: post #357
I-M-S wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

So long as those who have it deem it legal to perpetuate.

They define what's legal.

States are the most prolific users of violence by far.

Re: GPT-5.4

#530

Post by dana321 »

creamyhorror wrote: post #223

I've only used 5.4 for 1 prompt (edit: 3@high now) so far (reasoning: extra high, took really long), and it was to analyse my codebase and write an evaluation on a topic. But I found its writing and analysis thoughtful, precise, and surprisingly clearly written, unlike 5.3-Codex. It feels very lucid and uses human phrasing. It might be my AGENTS.md requiring clearer, simpler language, but at least 5.4's doing a good…

5.4 very high didn't notice in my codebase a glaring issue that drops all data being sent around the network.
Post reply on HN