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

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4.5

#871

Post by vbezhenar »

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 feel like it was GPT-5 which was eventually renamed to keep up with expectations.

Re: GPT-4.5

#872

Post by NewUser76312 »

swatcoder wrote: post #57
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…

> We look forward to learning more about its strengths, capabilities, and potential applications in real-world settings. If GPT‑4.5 delivers unique value for your use case, your feedback (opens in a new window) will play an important role in guiding our decision. "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If…

"We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If you can figure something out, we need you to help us."

Damn this never worked for me as a startup founder lol. Need that Altman "rizz" or what have you.

Re: GPT-4.5

#873

Post by aurareturn »

jiggawatts wrote: post #188
apsec112 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI GPUs are bottlenecked mostly by high-bandwidth memory (HBM) chips and CoWoS (packaging tech used to integrate HBM with the GPU die), which are in short supply and aren't found in consumer cards at all

You would think that by now they would have done something to ramp production capacity…

Maybe demand is that great?

Re: GPT-4.5

#874

Post by organsnyder »

tinco wrote: post #788
ethbr1 wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nice to know the new Turing test is generating effective VC pitch decks.

Joke's on us, the VC's are using LLM's to evaluate the pitch decks.

That actually wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, unfortunately.

Re: GPT-4.5

#875

Post by financetechbro »

NewUser76312 wrote: post #872
swatcoder wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We look forward to learning more about its strengths, capabilities, and potential applications in real-world settings. If GPT‑4.5 delivers unique value for your use case, your feedback (opens in a new window) will play an important role in guiding our decision. "We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If…

"We don't really know what this is good for, but spent a lot of money and time making it and are under intense pressure to announce new things right now. If you can figure something out, we need you to help us." Damn this never worked for me as a startup founder lol. Need that Altman "rizz" or what have you.

Maybe you didn’t push hard enough the impending doom that your product would bring to society

Re: GPT-4.5

#876

Post by mlyle »

egobrain27 wrote: post #823
simonw wrote: post #342

I got gpt-4.5-preview to summarize this discussion thread so far (at 324 comments): hn-summary.sh 43197872 -m gpt-4.5-preview Using this script: https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/claude-hacker-news-themes... Here's the result: https://gist.github.com/simonw/5e9f5e94ac8840f698c280293d399... It took 25797 input tokens and 1225 input tokens, for a total cost (calculated using https://tools.simonwillison.net/llm-prices…

Seems to have trouble recognizing sarcasm: "For example, there are now a bunch of vendors that sell 'respond to RFP' AI products... paying 30x for marginally better performance makes perfect sense." — hn_throwaway_99 (an uncommon opinion supporting possible niche high-cost uses).

? You think hn_throwaway_99's comment is sarcastic? It makes perfect sense to me read "straight."

That is, sales orgs save a bunch of money using AI to respond to RFPs; they would still save a bunch of money using a more expensive AI, and any marginal improvement in sales closed would pay for it.

It maybe excessively summarized his comment which confused you-- but this is the kind of mistake human curators of quotes make, too.

Re: GPT-4.5

#877

Post by andy_ppp »

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…

Getting graphic designers to use the design system that they invented is quite a challenge too if I'm honest... should we really expect AI to be better than people? Having said that AI is never going to be adept at knowing how and when to ignore the human in the loop and do the "right" thing.

Re: GPT-4.5

#878

Post by TremendousJudge »

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...

This is just amazing

Re: GPT-4.5

#879

Post by gom_jabbar »

rjinman wrote: post #865
cle wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 rel…

> we just shouldn’t do it.

I think what Accelerationism gets right is that capitalism is just doing it - autonomizing itself - and that our agency is very limited, especially given the arms race dynamics and the rise of decentralized blockchain infrastructure.

As Nick Land puts it, in his characteristically detached style, in A Quick-and-Dirty Introduction to Accelerationism:

"As blockchains, drone logistics, nanotechnology, quantum computing, computational genomics, and virtual reality flood in, drenched in ever-higher densities of artificial intelligence, accelerationism won't be going anywhere, unless ever deeper into itself. To be rushed by the phenomenon, to the point of terminal institutional paralysis, is the phenomenon. Naturally — which is to say completely inevitably — the human species will define this ultimate terrestrial event as a problem. To see it is already to say: We have to do something. To which accelerationism can only respond: You're finally saying that now? Perhaps we ought to get started? In its colder variants, which are those that win out, it tends to laugh." [0]

[0] https://retrochronic.com/#a-quick-and-dirty-introduction-to-...

Re: GPT-4.5

#880

Post by philomath_mn »

dingnuts wrote: post #593
philomath_mn wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually throw a lot of context at it and have it write unit tests in a certain style or implement something (with tests) according to a spec. But the o3-mini-high results have been just as good. I am fine with Deep Research taking 5-8 minutes, those are usually "reports" I can read whenever.

I bet I can generate unit tests just as fast and for a fraction of the cost, and probably less typing, with a couple vim macros

Idk, it is pretty good a generating synthetic data and recognizing the different logic branches to exercise. Not perfect, but very helpful.
Post reply on HN