Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why no grok 4.1 reasoning?
Do people other than Elon fans use grok? Honest question. I've never tried it.
[dead]
GPT-5.2
761–770 of 1001 posts
Re: GPT-5.2
#762Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do people other than Elon fans use grok? Honest question. I've never tried it.
I can't understand why people would trust a CEO that regularly lies about product timelines, product features, his own personal life, etc. And that's before politicizing his entire kingdom by literally becoming a part of government and one of the larger donations of the current administration.
Because not everyone makes their decisions through the prism of politics
Re: GPT-5.2
#763Wow, there's a lot going on with this pelican riding a bicycle: https://gist.github.com/simonw/c31d7afc95fe6b40506a9562b5e83...
I added GPT-5.2 Pro to my pelican-alternatives benchmark for the first three prompts: Generate an SVG of an octopus operating a pipe organ Generate an SVG of a giraffe assembling a grandfather clock Generate an SVG of a starfish driving a bulldozer https://gally.net/temp/20251107pelican-alternatives/index.ht... GPT-5.2 Pro cost about 80 cents per prompt through OpenRouter, so I stopped there. I don’t feel like spendi…
Hi, it doesn't have Gemini 3.5 Pro which seems to be the best at this
Re: GPT-5.2
#764For the first time, I've actually hidden an AI story on HN. I can't even anymore. Sorry this is not going anywhere.
Here, take my downvote.
Re: GPT-5.2
#765In my experience, the best models are already nearly as good as you can be for a large fraction of what I personally use them for, which is basically as a more efficient search engine.
The thing that would now make the biggest difference isn't "more intelligence", whatever that might mean, but better grounding.
It's still a big issue that the models will make up plausible sounding but wrong or misleading explanations for things, and verifying their claims ends up taking time. And if it's a topic you don't care about enough, you might just end up misinformed.
I think Google/Gemini realize this, since their "verify" feature is designed to address exactly this. Unfortunately it hasn't worked very well for me so far.
But to me it's very clear that the product that gets this right will be the one I use.
Re: GPT-5.2
#766I feel there is a point when all these benchmarks are meaningless. What I care about beyond decent performance is the user experience. There I have grudges with every single platform and the one thing keeping me as a paid ChatGPT subscriber is the ability to sort chats in "projects" with associated files (hello Google, please wake up to basic user-friendly organisation!) But all of them * Lie far too often with confi…
I'm not an expert but my understanding is transformers based models simply can't do some of those things, it isn't really how they work.
Especially something like expressing a certainty %, you might be able to get it to output one but it's just making it up. LLMs are incredibly useful (I use them every day) but you'll always have to check important output
Re: GPT-5.2
#767Undoubtedly 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…
I always liked the definition of technology as "doing more with less". 100 oxen replaced by 1 gallon of diesel, etc. That it costs more does suggest it's "doing more with more", at least.
Good luck with reproducing and eating diesel like can be done with oxen and related species.
Humanity won't be able to tap into this highly compressed energy stock that was generated through processes taking literally geological scales time to bed achieved.
That is, technology is more about what alternative tradeoffs can we leverage on to organize differently with resources at hand.
Frugality can definitely be a possible way to shape the technologies we want to deploy. But it's not all possible technologies, just a subset.
Also better technology is not necessarily bringing societies to morale and well-being excellency. Improving technology for efficient genocides for example is going to bring human disaster as obvious outcome, even if it's done in a manner that is the most green, zero-carbon emissions and growing more forests delivered beyond expectations of the specifications.
Re: GPT-5.2
#768In my experience, the best models are already nearly as good as you can be for a large fraction of what I personally use them for, which is basically as a more efficient search engine. The thing that would now make the biggest difference isn't "more intelligence", whatever that might mean, but better grounding. It's still a big issue that the models will make up plausible sounding but wrong or misleading explanations…
Isn't that what no LLM can provide: being free of hallucinations?
Re: GPT-5.2
#769A new model doesn't address the fundamental reliability issues with OpenAI's enterprise tier.
As an enterprise customer, the experience has been disappointing. The platform is unstable, support is slow to respond even when escalated to account managers, and the UI is painfully slow to use. There are also baffling feature gaps, like the lack of connectors for custom GPTs.
None of the major providers have a perfect enterprise solution yet, but given OpenAI's market position, the gap between expectations and delivery is widening.
Re: GPT-5.2
#770Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, the point we wanted to make here is that GPT-5.2's vision is better, not perfect. Cherrypicking a perfect output would actually mislead readers, and that wasn't our intent.
Oh and you guys don't mislead people ever. Your management is just completely trustworthy, and I'm sure all you guys are too. Give me a break, man. If I were you, I would jump ship or you're going to be like a Theranos employee on LinkedIn.
Hey no need to personally attack anyone. A bad organization can still consist good people.