Live data from Hacker News

GPT-4o

openai.com

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4o

#691
What especially blows my mind is not GPT4o. It's that:

1. Nobody could convincingly beat GPT4 in over a year, despite spending billions of dollars trying.

2. There's GPT5 coming out sometime soon that will blow this out of the water and make paying $20/mo to OpenAI still worthwhile.

Re: GPT-4o

#693

I worry that this tech will amplify the cultural values we have of "good" and "bad" emotions way more than the default restrictions that social media platforms put on the emoji reactions (e.g., can't be angry on LinkedIn). I worry that the AI will not express anger, not express sadness, not express frustration, not express uncertainty, and many other emotions that the culture of the fine-tuners might believe are "bad…

I'm yet to find a normal prompt (non offensive) that will disagree with you. If there is something subjective, it will err on your side to maintain connection, in a way humans do. I don't have a bit issue with this, but it will not (yet) plainly say "You're wrong, and this is why". If it did.. There would be an uncomfortable feeling for the users, that's not good for a profit driven company.

I find this is fairly easy to do by making both sides of the disagreement third-person and prompting it as a dialog writing exercise. This is akin to how GPT-3 implemented chat. So you do something like:

    You will be helping the user write a dialog between two characters,
    Mr Contrarian and Mr Know-It-All. The user will write all the dialog
    for Mr Know-It-All and you will write for Mr Contrarian.

    Mr Contrarian likes to disagree. He tries to hide it by inventing
    good rationales for his argument, but really he just wants to get
    under Mr Know-It-All's skin.

    Write your dialog like:
      I disagree with you strongly!

    Below is the transcript...
And then user input is always giving like:

    Hi there
(Always wrapped in tags, never bare input which will be confused for a directive.)

I haven't tested this exact prompt, but the general pattern works well for me. (I write briefly about some of these approaches here: https://ianbicking.org/blog/2024/04/roleplaying-by-llm#simpl...)

Re: GPT-4o

#694
What would be the difference in compute for inference on an audioaudio model like this compared to a texttext model?

Re: GPT-4o

#695
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned, but this is like shades of the universal translator from star trek.

We have tricorders now (mobile phones), universal translators in the looming... when is transporter technology going to get here?

Re: GPT-4o

#697
post #691

What especially blows my mind is not GPT4o. It's that: 1. Nobody could convincingly beat GPT4 in over a year, despite spending billions of dollars trying. 2. There's GPT5 coming out sometime soon that will blow this out of the water and make paying $20/mo to OpenAI still worthwhile.

More accurately, it's impressive that Microsoft, through OpenAI, has stayed ahead of Google, AWS, and Apple while adding $1 trillion to its market cap.

I wouldn't have predicted that it would play out this way.

Re: GPT-4o

#698

I've worked quite a bit with STT and TTS over the past ~7 years, and this is the most impressive and even startling demo I've seen. But I would like to see how this is integrated into applications by third party developers where the AI is doing a specific job. Is it still as impressive? The biggest challenge I've had with building any autonomous "agents" with generic LLM's is they are overly gullible and accommodatin…

I’ve found using logic trees with LLMs isn’t necessarily a problem or a deficit. I suppose if they were truly magical and could intuit the right response every time, cool, but I’d always worry about the potential for error and hallucinations. I’ve found that you can create declarative logic trees from JSON and use that as a prompt for the LLM, which it can then use to traverse the tree accordingly. The only issue I’v…

Any recommendations on patterns/approaches for these declarative logic trees and where you put which types of logic (logic which goes in the prompt, logic which goes in the code which parses the prompt response, how to detect errors in the response and retry the prompt, etc). On "Show HN" I see a lot of "fully automated agents" which seem interesting, but not sure if they are over-kill or not.

Re: GPT-4o

#699
post #690
post #495

We've had voice input and voice output with computers for a long time, but it's never felt like spoken conversation. At best it's a series of separate voice notes. It feels more like texting than talking. These demos show people talking to artificial intelligence. This is new. Humans are more partial to talking than writing. When people talk to each other (in person or over low-latency audio) there's a rich metadata…

> Humans are more partial to talking than writing. Is it so? Speaking most of the time is for short exchange of information (pleasantries to essential information exchanges). I prefer writing for long in-depth thought exchanges (whether by emails, blogs etc.) In many cultures - European or Asian, people are not very loquacious in everyday life.

Time and place

I’m 100% a text everything never calls person but I can’t live without Alexa these days, every time I’m in a hotel or on vacation I nearly ask a question out loud.

I also hate how much Alexa sucks so this is a big deal. I spent years weeding out what it could do and can’t do so it will be nice to have one that I don’t have to treat like a toddler

Re: GPT-4o

#700

The AI duet really starts to hint at what will make AI so powerful. It’s not just that they’re smart, it’s that they can be cloned. If your wallet is large enough, you can make 2 GPTs sing just as easily as you can make 100 GPTs sing. What can you do with a billion GPTs?

> you can make 2 GPTs sing just as easily as you can make 100 GPTs sing.

> What can you do with a billion GPTs?

The world's largest choir?

Post reply on HN