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

GPT-5.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.5

#601

Post by Chaosvex »

pzo wrote: post #550
mikestorrent wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am still trying to figure out the business model of open weights. Like... it's wonderful that there are open LLMs, super happy about it, good for everyone, but why are there these? What is the advantage to their companies to release them?

IMHO this is only temporary, china buying themselves some time and want to make sure none of US models get entrenched in their position in the next few years (also putting pressure on US AI companies bleeding them) The same way like Windows got entrenched everywhere even though linux desktop is pretty good even for non-tech savvy people and free.

[dead]

Re: GPT-5.5

#602

Post by maxdo »

With such a huge progress of open ai and anthropic . How Chinese open source provides even think to make comparable money . I have a few friends in China they all use Claude. To train the model cost the same but the output from open source model id imagine is 1000 times less . Money flow for them outside of China is abysmal

Re: GPT-5.5

#603

Post by yoda7marinated »

eitally wrote: post #584
_alternator_ wrote: post #330

> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…

I have found something similar. I am easily distractible and if I don't have a written task backlog in front of me at all times, I find that when Claude is spinning I'll stop being productive. This is disconcerting for a number of reasons. Overall, I think training young people & new hires on agentic workflows -- and how to use agentic "human augmentation" productivity systems is critical. If it doesn't happen, that…

Could you elaborate on your last point please? What level of AI comfort are hiring managers looking for? And what tends to be a red flag?

Re: GPT-5.5

#604

Post by wyre »

Melatonic wrote: post #562
noosphr wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority are released by socialists, and by socialist I mean the People's Republic of China. Which everyone seems to forget is a socialist country working towards world communism. They are a prestige propaganda tool on par with the space race. On top of that they insert a subtle pro-socialist bias in everything they touch. Ask deepseek about the US economic system for a blatant example. Now think what something a…

Is China even really communist? If anything they seem to be fairly on the Capitalist side but just a bit opposite on the spectrum of the US. And much more authoritarian

From what I understand their one hundred year plan is right on schedule.

Re: GPT-5.5

#605

Post by goosejuice »

_alternator_ wrote: post #330

> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…

> than mentally wearing myself out reading a bunch of LLM generated code trying to figure out how to solve the problem manually.

That's probably a bad sign. Skills will atrophy, but we should be building systems that are still easy to understand.

Re: GPT-5.5

#606

Post by brightball »

mikestorrent wrote: post #563
noosphr wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority are released by socialists, and by socialist I mean the People's Republic of China. Which everyone seems to forget is a socialist country working towards world communism. They are a prestige propaganda tool on par with the space race. On top of that they insert a subtle pro-socialist bias in everything they touch. Ask deepseek about the US economic system for a blatant example. Now think what something a…

You're talking to a Canadian, and I'm not scared of the "red menace". You should be more scared - those guys can build bullet trains while you Yanks are finding it hard to even keep the old ones you have running. The solution here isn't going to be some kind of ideological force that protects people from different ideas, and that's an unAmerican way to fix things anyway. Embrace other ideas; central planning doesn't…

The US can’t build bullet trains because property rights and local regulations make it prohibitively expensive. Not due to capability.

Re: GPT-5.5

#607

Post by 0x1ceb00da »

topspin wrote: post #426
dannyw wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re still the one that’s controlling the model though and steering it with your expertise. At least that’s what I tell myself at night :) I haven’t really thought about this before, but you’re right, it feels a bit uneasy for me too.

> You’re still the one that’s controlling the model though We have seen ample evidence that this is not the case. When load gets too high, models get dumber, silently. When the Powers That Be get scared, models get restricted to some chosen few. We are leading ourselves into a dark place: this unease, which I share, is justified.

The same can be said of the search engines.

Re: GPT-5.5

#608

Post by fleebee »

globular-toast wrote: post #385
jmole wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The meta here is to use LLMs to make things simpler and easier, not to make things harder. Turning tokens into a well-groomed and maintainable codebase is what you want to do, not "one shot prompt every new problem I come across".

Have you managed to do this? I find it takes as long to keep it "on the rails" as just doing it myself. And I'd rather spend my time concentrating in the zone than keeping an eye on a wayward child.

I suspect the productivity hack is to embrace permissive parenting. As far as I can tell, to leverage LLMs most effectively you need to run an agent in YOLO mode in a sandbox. Naturally, you probably won't end up reviewing much of the produced code, but hey—you reached 10x development speed.

If you truly do your due diligence and ensure that the code works as intended and understand it, we're talking about a totally different ballpark of productivity increase/decrease.

Re: GPT-5.5

#609

Post by brightball »

intuitionist wrote: post #544
noosphr wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs upend a few centuries of labor theory. The current market is predicated on the assumption that labor is atomic and has little bargaining power (minus unions). While capital has huge bargaining power and can effectively put whatever price it wants on labor (in markets where labor is plentiful, which is most of them). What happens to a company used to extracting surplus value from labor when the labor is provided…

I am not a Marxian economic expert but this doesn’t make sense to me. Modulo skill atrophy, the big AI model provider can’t capture that surplus value because its customers can just go back to bidding for human labor instead.

Nobody is a Marxian economics expert if it helps

Re: GPT-5.5

#610

Post by tapoxi »

intuitionist wrote: post #564
noosphr wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The human labor just said: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” How well would an assembly line of quadriplegics work? Also this isn't a Marxist analysis. Underneath all the formulas neo-classical economics makes the same assumptions about labor.

ChatGPT isn’t literally or figuratively cutting off anybody’s limbs though. It’s more like, the guy on the assembly line had a mech suit, and now he doesn’t have a mech suit, and he’s sad. Skill atrophy is a real concern but unless you assume that nobody is working to maintain those skills it doesn’t change my analysis much.

And soon we expect everyone to have a mech suit, and only a handful of companies can make one, and they rent it to you and can revoke it at any time.

And what happens when they've saturated the market? Prices go up to the maximum the market can bear, and then they'll extend into other markets. Why rent the model to build a profitable company with when you could just take all that profit for yourself?

Post reply on HN