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

GPT-4.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4.5

#861

Post by whimsicalism »

yurishimo wrote: post #796
fergonco wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> will nonetheless make people's lives better Probably not the lives of translators or graphic designers or music compositors. They will have to find new jobs. As llm prompt engineers, I guess.

Graphic designers I think are safe, at least within organizations that require a cohesive brand strategy. Getting the AI to respect all of the previous art will be a challenge at a certain scale. Fiverr graphic designers on the other hand…

absolutely a solvable problem even with no tech advances

Re: GPT-4.5

#862

Post by eddiewithzato »

lovasoa wrote: post #839
jodrellblank wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Early testing shows that interacting with GPT‑4.5 feels more natural. Its broader knowledge base, improved ability to follow user intent, and greater “EQ” make it useful for tasks like improving writing, programming, and solving practical problems. We also expect it to hallucinate less." "Early testing doesn't show that it hallucinates less, but we expect that putting that sentence nearby will lead you to draw a c…

In the second handpicked example they give, GPT-4.5 says that "The Trojan Women Setting Fire to Their Fleet" by the French painter Claude Lorrain is renowned for its luminous depiction of fire. That is a hallucination. There is no fire at all in the painting, only some smoke. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trojan_Women_Set_Fire_to_t...

AI crash is gonna lead to decade long winter

Re: GPT-4.5

#863

Post by brador »

There are companies that will pay $1M+ per answer IF it comes with a guaranteed solution or full cash back refund.

This is why being the top tier AI is so valuable.

Re: GPT-4.5

#864

Post by pera »

km144 wrote: post #841
netdevphoenix wrote: post #756

Is it official then? Most of us have been waiting for this moment for a while. The transformer architecture as it is currently understood can't be milked any further. Many of us knew this since last year. GPT-5 delays eventually led to non-tech voices to suggest likewise. But we all held our final decision until the next big release from OpenAI as Sam Altman has been making claims about AGI entering the workforce thi…

I'm not convinced that LLMs in their current state are really making anyone's lives much better though. We really need more research applications for this technology for that to become apparent. Polluting the internet with regurgitated garbage produced by a chat bot does not benefit the world. Increasing the productivity of software developers does not help to the world. Solving more important problems should be the…

The explosion of garbage content is a big issue and has radically changed the way I use the web over the past year: Google and DuckDuckGo are not my primary tools anymore, instead I am now using specialized search engines more and more, for example, if I am looking for something I believe can be found in someone's personal blog I just use Marginalia or Mojeek, if I am searching for software issues I use GitHub's search, general info straight to Wikipedia, tech reviews HN's Algolia etc.

It might sound a bit cumbersome but it's actually super easy if you assign search keywords in your browser: for instance if I am looking for something on GitHub I just open a new tab on Firefox and type "gh tokio".

Re: GPT-4.5

#865

Post by rjinman »

cle wrote: post #857
rjinman wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who is terrified of agentic ASI, I desperately hope this is true. We need more time to figure out alignment.

I'm not sure this will ever be solved. It requires both a technical solution and social consensus. I don't see consensus on "alignment" happening any time soon. I think it'll boil down to "aligned with the goals of the nation-state", and lots of nation states have incompatible goals.

I agree unfortunately. I might be a bit of an extremist on this issue. I genuinely think that building agentic ASI is suicidally stupid and we just shouldn’t do it. All the utopian visions we hear from the optimists describe unstable outcomes. A world populated by super-intelligent agents will be incredibly dangerous even if it appears initially to have gone well. We’ll have built a paradise in which we can never relax.

Re: GPT-4.5

#866

Post by Workaccount2 »

km144 wrote: post #841
netdevphoenix wrote: post #756

Is it official then? Most of us have been waiting for this moment for a while. The transformer architecture as it is currently understood can't be milked any further. Many of us knew this since last year. GPT-5 delays eventually led to non-tech voices to suggest likewise. But we all held our final decision until the next big release from OpenAI as Sam Altman has been making claims about AGI entering the workforce thi…

I'm not convinced that LLMs in their current state are really making anyone's lives much better though. We really need more research applications for this technology for that to become apparent. Polluting the internet with regurgitated garbage produced by a chat bot does not benefit the world. Increasing the productivity of software developers does not help to the world. Solving more important problems should be the…

LLM's have been extremely useful for me. They are incredibly powerful programmers, from the perspective of people who aren't programmers.

Just this past week claude 3.7 wrote a program for us to use to quickly modernize ancient (1990's) proprietary manufacturing machine files to contemporary automation files.

This allowed us to forgo a $1k/yr/user proprietary software package that would be able to do the same. The program Claude wrote took about 30 mins to make. Granted the program is extremely narrow in scope, but it does the one thing we need it to do.

This marks the third time I (a non-progammer) have used an LLM to create software that my company uses daily. The other two are a test system made by GPT-4 and an android app made by a mix of 4o and claude 3.5.

Bumpers may be useless and laughable to pro bowlers, but a godsend to those who don't really know what they are doing. We don't need to hire a bowler to knock over pins anymore.

Re: GPT-4.5

#868

Post by sudosysgen »

anshumankmr wrote: post #726
sudosysgen wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean the scaling laws were always logarithms, and logarithms become arbitrarily close to flat if you can't drive them with exponential growth, and even if you do it's barely linear. The scaling laws always predicted that model scaling would stop/slow being practical at some point.

Right but the quantum leap in capabilities that came from GPT2->GPT3->GPT3.5Turbo (which I personally felt didn't fare as well at coding as the former)->GPT4 won't be replicated anytime soon with the pure text/chat generation models.

Sure, that's also predicted by a logarithmic scaling law, you have extremely rapid growth until the inflection point.

Re: GPT-4.5

#869

Post by janoc »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #329
zaptrem wrote: post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

The price is obviously 15-30x that of 4o, but I'd just posit that there are some use cases where it may make sense. It probably doesn't make sense for the "open-ended consumer facing chatbot" use case, but for other use cases that are fewer and higher value in nature, it could if it's abilities are considerably better than 4o. For example, there are now a bunch of vendors that sell "respond to RFP" AI products. The n…

And which use case will that make sense then for?

Esp. when they aren't even sure whether they will commit to offering this long term? Who would be insane enough to build a product on top of something that may not be there tomorrow?

Those products require some extensive work, such a model finetuning on proprietary data. Who is going to invest time & money into something like that when OpenAI says right out of the gate they may not support this model for very long?

Basically OpenAI is telegraphing that this is yet another prototype that escaped a lab, not something that is actually ready for use and deployment.

Re: GPT-4.5

#870

Post by MagicMoonlight »

zaptrem wrote: post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

I put "hello" into it and it billed me 30p for it. Absolutely unusable, more expensive than realtime voice chat.
Post reply on HN