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

681–690 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5

#681

Post by Buttons840 »

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 idea of singularity--that AI will improve itself--is that it assumes intelligence is an important part of improving AI.

The AIs improve by gradient descent, still the same as ever. It's all basic math and a little calculus, and then making tiny tweaks to improve the model over and over and over.

There's not a lot of room for intelligence to improve upon this. Nobody sits down and thinks really hard, and the result of their intelligent thinking is a better model; no, the models improve because a computer continues doing basic loops over and over and over trillions of times.

That's my impression anyway. Would love to hear contrary views. In what ways can an AI actually improve itself?

Re: GPT-5

#682

Post by diego_sandoval »

joshmlewis wrote: post #645
AgentMatrixAI wrote: post #566

I'm not really convinced, the benchmark blunder was really strange but the demos were quite underwhelming, and it appears this was reflected by a huge market correction in the betting markets as to who will have the best AI by end of the year. What excites me now is that Gemini 3.0 or some answer from Google is coming soon and that will be the one I will actually end up using. It seems like the last mover in the LLM…

I am convinced. I've been giving it tasks the past couple hours that Opus 4.1 was failing on and it not only did them but cleaned up the mess Opus made. It's the real deal.

On that same vein, I had just tried Opus 4.1 yesterday, and it succesfully completed tasks that Sonnet 4 and Opus 4 failed at.

Re: GPT-5

#683

Post by zamadatix »

someuser54541 wrote: post #679
AgentMatrixAI wrote: post #566

I'm not really convinced, the benchmark blunder was really strange but the demos were quite underwhelming, and it appears this was reflected by a huge market correction in the betting markets as to who will have the best AI by end of the year. What excites me now is that Gemini 3.0 or some answer from Google is coming soon and that will be the one I will actually end up using. It seems like the last mover in the LLM…

Which betting markets were you referring to and where can they be viewed?

Polymarket has a whole AI category https://polymarket.com/search/ai?_sort=volume of markets.

Re: GPT-5

#684

Post by runarberg »

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.

I feel like technological singularity has been pretty solidly ruled as junk science, like cold fusion, Malthusian collapse, or Lynn’s IQ regression. Technologists have made numerous predictions and hypothetical scenarios, non of which have come to fruition, nor does it seem likely at any time in the future.

I think we should be treating AGI like Cold Fusion, phrenology, or even alchemy. It is not science, but science fiction. It is not going to happen and no research into AGI will provide anything of value (except for the grifters pushing the pseudo-science).

Re: GPT-5

#686

Post by fastball »

podgietaru wrote: post #562
sundarurfriend wrote: post #317

Some people have hypothesized that GPT-5 is actually about cost reduction and internal optimization for OpenAI, since there doesn't seem to be much of a leap forward, but another element that they seem to have focused on that'll probably make a huge difference to "normal" (non-tech) users is making precise and specifically worded prompts less necessary. They've mentioned improvements in that aspects a few times now,…

I just don’t know that you’d name that 5. The jump from 3 to 4 was huge. There was an expectation for similar outputs here. Making it cheaper is a good goal - certainly - but they needed a huge marketing win too.

It’s a new major because they are using it to deprecate other models.

Re: GPT-5

#687

Post by williamtrask »

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…

Breakthroughs usually require a step-function change in data or compute. All the firms have proportional amounts. Next big jump in data is probably private data (either via de-siloing or robotics or both). Next big jump in compute is probably either analog computing or quantum. Until then... here we are.

Re: GPT-5

#688

Post by mrits »

meribold wrote: post #685

Sad to see GPT-4.5 being gone. It knew things. More than any other model I'm aware of.

I can't imagine anyone leaving this comment besides GPT-4.5

Re: GPT-5

#690

Post by coderatlarge »

m4x wrote: post #678
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…

It's quite possible that the models from different companies are clustering together now because we're at a plateau point in model development, and won't see much in terms in further advances until we make the next significant breakthrough. I don't think this has anything to do with AGI. We aren't at AGI yet. We may be close or we may be a very long way away from AGI. Either way, current models are at a plateau and a…

while the model companies all compete on the same benchmarks it seems likely their models will all converge towards similar outcomes unless something really unexpected happens in model space around those limit points…
Post reply on HN