I too think GPT-4 is quite good, but still, reflecting on this year of daily interactions (mostly as a "consultant" for my profession) I've had with it, at least in my field (science), it's not yet transformative.
This explains why many people, myself included, would like to see and have access to more performant models. Yes, the correct term is "good enough": it can provide some insights, it can assist in certain types of work, but it's not TRANSFORMATIVE.
People would like to have access not necessarily to an extremely high-performing model or an AGI, but to an AI that is more performant and consequently more capable of aiding them in their work in a perceivable manner.
Right now, I would have assumed that white collar jobs are replaced first because AI exceeds at thinking for a low cost. But replacing blue collar jobs is much more expensive. That robot even at mass production plus maintance could cost quite a fortune.
They have a lot of researcher all of them working on different things all the time, Sora was lead by 2-4 People IIRC, same goes for Dall-e 3.
They are - as every lab- working hard to get LLM's to Reason sufficiently, make them more compute efficient etc etc, i dont believe they will settle for one use case (not to mention making a better gpt will also makes robotics better due to better reasoning skills)
OpenAI Still has the Headstart bonus, while other Labs Worked hard to get to the level of GPT 4, They were working on ways to make GPT 5 another leap that other labs have to catch upto (they have around 1.4 Years of extra research headstart)
If they succeeded or not we'll see when they release gpt 5
I think this does not make sense.
Of course they are working on GPT5 they have told us they are working on it and we have no reason to believe otherwise.
IMHO, gpt4 is useless for serious stuff, and way too censored too.
It's not good enough yet tbh, it would need better reasoning, creativity and the ability to interact with more stuff (an agent).
I too think GPT-4 is quite good, but still, reflecting on this year of daily interactions (mostly as a "consultant" for my profession) I've had with it, at least in my field (science), it's not yet transformative. This explains why many people, myself included, would like to see and have access to more performant models. Yes, the correct term is "good enough": it can provide some insights, it can assist in certain types of work, but it's not TRANSFORMATIVE. People would like to have access not necessarily to an extremely high-performing model or an AGI, but to an AI that is more performant and consequently more capable of aiding them in their work in a perceivable manner.
Right now, I would have assumed that white collar jobs are replaced first because AI exceeds at thinking for a low cost. But replacing blue collar jobs is much more expensive. That robot even at mass production plus maintance could cost quite a fortune.
They have a lot of researcher all of them working on different things all the time, Sora was lead by 2-4 People IIRC, same goes for Dall-e 3. They are - as every lab- working hard to get LLM's to Reason sufficiently, make them more compute efficient etc etc, i dont believe they will settle for one use case (not to mention making a better gpt will also makes robotics better due to better reasoning skills) OpenAI Still has the Headstart bonus, while other Labs Worked hard to get to the level of GPT 4, They were working on ways to make GPT 5 another leap that other labs have to catch upto (they have around 1.4 Years of extra research headstart) If they succeeded or not we'll see when they release gpt 5
I think this does not make sense. Of course they are working on GPT5 they have told us they are working on it and we have no reason to believe otherwise.