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

GPT-5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5

#971

Post by throwmeaway222 »

highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

AGI is either impossible over LLMs or is more of an agentic flow, which means we might already be there, but the LLM is too slow and/or expensive for us to consider AGI feasible over agents.

AGI over LLMs is basically 1 billion tokens for AI to answer the question: how do you feel? and a response of "fine"

Because it would mean it's simulating everything in the world over an agentic flow considering all possible options checking memory checking the weather checking the news... activating emotional agentic subsystems, checking state... saving state...

Re: GPT-5

#972

Post by m_a_g »

If it’s all going to be step changes from now on, doesn’t this mean we’re in an AI bubble and it might burst at any moment?

Re: GPT-5

#973

Post by keernan »

weego wrote: post #600
highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

I'm still stuck at the bit where just throwing more and more data to make a very complex encyclopedia with an interesting search interface that tricks us into believing it's human-like gets us to AGI when we have no examples and thus no evidence or understanding of where the GI part comes from. It's all just hyperbole to attract investment and shareholder value and the people peddling the idea of AGI as a tangible po…

I believe the analogy of a LLM being "a very complex encyclopedia with an interesting search interface" to be spot on.

However, I would not be so dismissive of the value. Many of us are reacting to the complete oversell of 'the encyclopedia' as being 'the eve of AGI' - as rightfully we should. But, in doing so, I believe it would be a mistake to overlook the incredible impact - and economic displacement - of having an encyclopedia comprised of all the knowledge of mankind that has "an interesting search interface" that is capable of enabling humans to use the interface to manipulate/detect connections between all that data.

Re: GPT-5

#974

Post by rustystump »

demirbey05 wrote: post #50

Seems LLMs really hit the wall.

I think the llm wall was hit a while ago and the jumps have been around finessing llms in novel ways for a better result. But the core is still very much the same it has been for a while.

The crypto level hype claims are all bs and we all knew that but i do use an llm more than google now which is the there there so to speak.

This does feel like a flatlining of hype tho which is great because idk if i could take the ai hype train for much longer.

Re: GPT-5

#976

Post by trane_project »

Finally got access to it. It's so awful. I asked it something, answered in Spanish with something completely different. In another conversation, it kept giving me completely different answers to something I didn't even ask. Telling it to stop doesn't do anything. It ignores it and continues a conversation with itself.

Re: GPT-5

#977

Post by dabockster »

somenameforme wrote: post #923
highfrequency wrote: post #331

It is frequently suggested that once one of the AI companies reaches an AGI threshold, they will take off ahead of the rest. It's interesting to note that at least so far, the trend has been the opposite: as time goes on and the models get better, the performance of the different company's gets clustered closer together. Right now GPT-5, Claude Opus, Grok 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro all seem quite good across the board (ie the…

If AGI is ever achieved, it would open the door to recursive self improvement that would presumably rapidly exceed human capability across any and all fields, including AI development. So the AI would be improving itself while simultaneously also making revolutionary breakthroughs in essentially all fields. And, for at least a while, it would also presumably be doing so at an exponentially increasing rate. But I thin…

> diminishing returns

I think this is a hard kick below the belt for anyone trying to develop AGI using current computer science.

Current AIs only really generate - no, regenerate text based on their training data. They are only as smart as other data available. Even when an AI "thinks", it's only really still processing existing data rather than making a genuinely new conclusion. It's the best text processor ever created - but it's still just a text processor at its core. And that won't change without more hard computer science being performed by humans.

So yeah, I think we're starting to hit the upper limits of what we can do with Transformers technology. I'd be very surprised if someone achieved "AGI" with current tech. And, if it did get achieved, I wouldn't consider it "production ready" until it didn't need a nuclear reactor to power it.

Re: GPT-5

#978

Post by oconnor663 »

Argonaut998 wrote: post #943

They really nerfed Plus[0]. 80 messages every 3 hours for normal GPT-5. And only 200 messages per week for GPT-5 Thinking. It seems like terrible value. Before it was: 100 o3 per week 100 o4-mini-high per day 300 o4-mini per day 50 4.5 per week [0] https://help.openai.com/en/articles/11909943-gpt-5-in-chatgp...

The fast thing: 100/300 per day -> 640 per day (ish)

The expensive thing: 100 per week -> 200 per week

This is...the opposite of a nerf? The numbers goed up? (We can quibble about the daily vs hourly difference, but certainly for me the weekly cap was the only thing that mattered.)

Re: GPT-5

#979

Post by perdomon »

perdomon wrote: post #461

I've enabled GPT-5 in Copilot settings in the browser, but it's not showing up in VS Code. Anyone seeing it in VS Code yet?

It showed up about 4 hours after enabling it. Gradual rollout but it's working great now.

Re: GPT-5

#980

Post by muzani »

Argonaut998 wrote: post #943

They really nerfed Plus[0]. 80 messages every 3 hours for normal GPT-5. And only 200 messages per week for GPT-5 Thinking. It seems like terrible value. Before it was: 100 o3 per week 100 o4-mini-high per day 300 o4-mini per day 50 4.5 per week [0] https://help.openai.com/en/articles/11909943-gpt-5-in-chatgp...

They nerfed free too. Just yesterday, it felt like I had 50 gpt4o messages and had a 2 hour long conversation with it. Now I'm out with far less use at about 30 min.

I'm guessing they'll just announce massive tier generosity later considering how GPT-5 input tokens are half the price of 4.1 on the API. It's probably a way to keep the servers from being overloaded and to encourage people to buy Plus while the hype is hot.

Post reply on HN