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

GPT-5.2

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.2

#911

Post by namesbc »

AstroBen wrote: post #694
namesbc wrote: post #685

So the rosy biased estimate is OpenAI is saving 1 hour of work per day, so 5 hours total per-work week and 20 hours total per-month. With a subsidized cost of $200/month for OpenAI it would be cheaper to hirer a part-time minimum wage worker than it would be to contract with OpenAI. And that is the rosiest estimate OpenAI has.

What people here forget is coding is a tiny minority of the actual usage. ~5% if I remember correctly? Their best market might just be as a better Google with ads

Yep, bulk of AI usage is generating marketing emails

Re: GPT-5.2

#912

Post by balder1991 »

razster wrote: post #697
goobatrooba wrote: post #359

I 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…

The latest of the big three... OpenAI, Claude, and Google, none of their models are good. I've spent too much time monitoring them than just enjoying them. I've found it easier to run my own local LLM. The latest Gemini release, I gave it another go but only for it to misspell words and drift off into a fantasy world after a few chats with help restructuring guides. ChatGPT has become lazy for some reason and changes…

I have this impression that LLMs are so complicated and entangled (in comparison to previous machine learning models) that they’re just too difficult to tune all around.

What I mean is, it seems they try to tune them to a few certain things, that will make them worse on a thousand other things they’re not paying attention to.

Re: GPT-5.2

#913

Post by namesbc »

namesbc wrote: post #685

So the rosy biased estimate is OpenAI is saving 1 hour of work per day, so 5 hours total per-work week and 20 hours total per-month. With a subsidized cost of $200/month for OpenAI it would be cheaper to hirer a part-time minimum wage worker than it would be to contract with OpenAI. And that is the rosiest estimate OpenAI has.

It you take of the rosy glasses, it is more like 10 hours saved per-month at an unsubsidized cost of $1000/month

The $100/hr is worth it for US programming jobs, but nothing else

Re: GPT-5.2

#914

Post by namesbc »

dangoodmanUT wrote: post #686
namesbc wrote: post #685

So the rosy biased estimate is OpenAI is saving 1 hour of work per day, so 5 hours total per-work week and 20 hours total per-month. With a subsidized cost of $200/month for OpenAI it would be cheaper to hirer a part-time minimum wage worker than it would be to contract with OpenAI. And that is the rosiest estimate OpenAI has.

A part time minimum wage worker can't code

Check the wages of coders outside of the US

Re: GPT-5.2

#916

Post by BrtByte »

svara wrote: post #765

In 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…

I'm pretty much in the same camp. For a lot of everyday use, raw "intelligence" already feels good enough

Re: GPT-5.2

#917

Post by BrtByte »

agentifysh wrote: post #436

Looks like they've begun censoring posts at r/Codex and not allowing complaint threads so here is my honest take: - It is faster which is appreciated but not as fast as Opus 4.5 - I see no changes, very little noticeable improvements over 5.1 - I do not see any value in exchange for +40% in token costs All in all I can't help but feel that OpenAI is facing an existential crisis. Gemini 3 even when its used from AI St…

The speed bump is nice, but speed alone isn't a compelling upgrade if the qualitative difference isn't obvious in day-to-day use

Re: GPT-5.2

#918

Post by BrtByte »

mmaunder wrote: post #405

Weirdly, the blog announcement completely omits the actual new context window size which is 400,000: https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/gpt-5.2 Can I just say !!!!!!!! Hell yeah! Blog post indicates it's also much better at using the full context. Congrats OpenAI team. Huge day for you folks!! Started on Claude Code and like many of you, had that omg CC moment we all had. Then got greedy. Switched over to Codex…

This is one of those updates where the value only really shows up if you're already deep in the weeds

Re: GPT-5.2

#919

Post by jstummbillig »

blitz_skull wrote: post #575

Again I just tap the sign. All of your benchmarks mean nothing to me until you include Claude Sonnet on them. In my experience, GPT hasn’t been able to compete with Claude in years for the daily “economically valuable” tasks I work on.

Since as per Anthropics own benchmarks Sonnet 4.5 is beaten by Opus 4.5 would it not suffice to infer the rest?

https://x.com/OpenAI/status/1999182104362668275

Re: GPT-5.2

#920

Post by BrtByte »

EastLondonCoder wrote: post #859

I’ve been using GPT-4o and now 5.2 pretty much daily, mostly for creative and technical work. What helped me get more out of it was to stop thinking of it as a chatbot or knowledge engine, and instead try to model how it actually works on a structural level. The closest parallel I’ve found is Peter Gärdenfors’ work on conceptual spaces, where meaning isn’t symbolic but geometric. Fedorenko’s research on predictive se…

Once you drop the idea that it's a knowledge oracle and start treating it as a system that navigates a probability landscape, a lot of the confusion just evaporates
Post reply on HN