621–630 of 1001 posts
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.
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…
> 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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A new pretrain would definitely get more than a .1 version bump & would get a whole lot more hype I'd think. They're expensive to do!
Not necessarily. GPT-4.5 was a new pretrain on top of a sizeable raw model scale bump, and only got 0.5 - because the gains from reasoning training in o-series overshadowed GPT-4.5's natural advantage over GPT-4. OpenAI might have learned not to overhype. They already shipped GPT-5 - which was only an incremental upgrade over o3, and was received poorly, with this being a part of the reason why.
It was a generational leap if there ever has been one. Much bigger than 3.5 to 4.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Context windows for web Fast (GPT‑5.2 Instant) Free: 16K Plus / Business: 32K Pro / Enterprise: 128K Thinking (GPT‑5.2 Thinking) All paid tiers: 196K https://help.openai.com/en/articles/11909943-gpt-52-in-chatg...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> Or if the chat got too long (still below 100k however) they deleted your first messages. This was 3 months ago. I can believe that, but it also seems really silly? If your max context window is X and the chat has approached that, instead of outright deleting the first messages outright, why not have your model summarise the first quarter of tokens and place those at the beginning of the log you feed as context? Sin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 have tried the models and in domains I know well they are pathetic. They remove all nuance, make errors that non-experts do not notice and generally produce horrible code. It is even worse in non-programming domains, where they chop up 100 websites and serve you incorrect bland slop. If you are using them as a search helper, that sometimes works, though 2010 Google produced better results. Oracle dropped 11% today…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Replace 'products' with 'message', 'tech' with 'religion' and 'CEO' with 'prophet' and you have a bog-standard cult recruitment pitch.
Looks like they've begun censoring posts at r/Codex and not allowing complaint threads so here is my honest take: - It is faster which is appreciated but not as fast as Opus 4.5 - I see no changes, very little noticeable improvements over 5.1 - I do not see any value in exchange for +40% in token costs All in all I can't help but feel that OpenAI is facing an existential crisis. Gemini 3 even when its used from AI St…
Did you notice much improvement going from Gemini 2.5 to 3? I didn't I just think they're all struggling to provide real world improvements
Undoubtedly each new model from OpenAi has numerous training and orchestration improvements etc. But how much of each product they release also just a factor of how much they are willing to spend on inference per query in order to stay competitive? I always wonder how much is technical change vs turning a knob up and down on hardware and power consumption. GTP5.0 for example seemed like a lot of changes more for Open…
That it costs more does suggest it's "doing more with more", at least.