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

GPT-5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5

#661

Post by blitzar »

davidhs wrote: post #571
doctoboggan wrote: post #61

Watching the livestream now, the improvement over their current models on the benchmarks is very small. I know they seemed to be trying to temper our expectations leading up to this, but this is much less improvement than I was expecting

> I know they seemed to be trying to temper our expectations leading up to this Before the release of the model Sam Altman tweeted a picture of the Death Star appearing over the horizon of a planet.

Is he suggesting his company is designed with a womp rat sized opening that if you shoot a bullet into makes the whole thing explode?

Re: GPT-5

#662

Post by adastra22 »

hnlmorg wrote: post #633
highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

The reason AGI would create a singularity is because of its ability to self learn. Presently we are still a long way from that. In my opinion we at least are as far away from AGI as 1970s mainframes were from LLMs. I really don’t expect to see AGI in my lifetime.

That is already happening. These labs are writing next gen models using next gen models, with greater levels of autonomy. That doesn’t get the hard takeoff people talk about because those hypotheticals don’t consider sources of error, noise, and drift.

Re: GPT-5

#663

Post by Muromec »

hnlmorg wrote: post #633
highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

The reason AGI would create a singularity is because of its ability to self learn. Presently we are still a long way from that. In my opinion we at least are as far away from AGI as 1970s mainframes were from LLMs. I really don’t expect to see AGI in my lifetime.

We have an ability to self learn right now, but we stil suck at basics

Re: GPT-5

#665

Post by dmezzetti »

highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

LLMs are basically all the same at this point. The margins are razor thin.

The real take-off / winner-take-all potential is in retrieval and knowing how to provide the best possible data to the LLM. That strategy will work regardless of the model.

Re: GPT-5

#666

Post by satyrun »

ycosynot wrote: post #214

Damn, you guys are toxic. So -- they did not invent AGI yet. Yet, I like what I'm seeing. Major progress on multiple fronts. Hallucination fix is exciting on its own. The React demos were mindblowing.

lol downvoted of course.

HN is just for insecure , miserable shitheads.

Re: GPT-5

#667

Post by russellbeattie »

hnlmorg wrote: post #633
highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

The reason AGI would create a singularity is because of its ability to self learn. Presently we are still a long way from that. In my opinion we at least are as far away from AGI as 1970s mainframes were from LLMs. I really don’t expect to see AGI in my lifetime.

This is the key - right now each new model has had countless resources dedicated to training, then they are more or less set in stone until the next update.

These big models don't dynamically update as days pass by - they don't learn. A personal assistant service may be able to mimic learning by creating a database of your data or preferences, but your usage isn't baked back into the big underlying model permanently.

I don't agree with "in our lifetimes", but the difference between training and learning is the bright red line. Until there's a model which is able to continually update itself, it's not AGI.

My guess is that this will require both more powerful hardware and a few more software innovations. But it'll happen.

Re: GPT-5

#668

Post by markasoftware »

lamontcg wrote: post #540
highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

> they can all basically solve moderately challenging math and coding problems Yesterday, Claude Opus 4.1 failed in trying to figure out that `-(1-alpha)` or `-1+alpha` is the same as `alpha-1`. We are still a little bit away from AGI.

this is what i don't get. How can GPT-5 ace obscure AIME problems while simultaneously falling into the trap of the most common fallacy about airfoils (despite there being copious training data calling it out as a fallacy)? And I believe you that in some context it failed to understand this simple rearrangement of terms; there's sometimes basic stuff I ask it that it fails at too.

Re: GPT-5

#669

Post by Zone3513 »

joshmlewis wrote: post #641

It's a really good model from my testing so far. You can see the difference in how it tries to use tools to the greatest extent when answering a question, especially compared to 4.1 and o3. In this example it used 6! tool calls in the first response to try and collect as much info as possible. https://promptslice.com/share/b-2ap_rfjeJgIQsG

That movie doesn't even exist. There is no Thunder Run from 2025.
Post reply on HN