What do people get out of being so reductionist?

Every time a new model comes out, people come out in droves "oh I don't notice anything different".

People have been saying this about <currentModel-1> for 2 years now, and the entire state of AI has changed dramatically.

It cannot be that the next AI model isn't better, but also suddenly what they are capable of is on an entirely different level.

▲

amelius an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I suppose it's the reverse of Amara's law:

"We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run"

▲

singpolyma3 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They've been pretty capable for a very long time. I don't think the models are getting more capable so much as people are getting better at using them and more people are getting the opportunity to be impressed.

▲

alstonite an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’ve seen overwhelmingly that when a model is good people see it, and when it isn’t, they criticize. I’ve seen nothing but ‘wow this is a huge step up’ from Opus 5.5. I felt this way about Opus 4.5, GPT-5.6 Sol/Luna, and to a lesser extent with Fable and Astra. But Opus 5 was ass, and the entire gpt 6 line feels like OpenAI’s version of that.

▲

ulimn an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I suspect it's partly because people didn't jump from GPT-3 to GPT-6.1 Sol and partly because SOTA models from the last few(?) months have been able to tackle most of the regular tasks. It means this new model isn't different in that regard from Opus 4.8, if your mental benchmark is that they both are capable of implementing something like a CRUD app.

▲

sosuke an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I like the fast releases. 6.1 coming so fast after 6.0 means they found some improvement solid enough for a new rollout.

The only time I remember the newest model making an obvious regression was when the first rolled out MoE. Super speed update but each request had less intelligence at hand. We’re way past that now

▲

hgoel an hour ago | parent [-]

It seems strange though.

Did they find this improvement within the week? If so, given all their whinging about safety, it seems irresponsible to only test the improved model for less than a week.

Did they find the improvement more than a week ago? If so, why bother releasing GPT 6 if they knew they had a better version essentially ready to go?

	▲	sznio an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Pipelining. They probably have 6.2 just about ready, while 7 and 8 are still being cooked up. You can work on multiple releases in parallel. We're just getting the latest training checkpoints constantly, just to edge out the other lab, while they are trying to come up with something worthy of a new major version number. It's actually worrying, since there's so much pressure to release now.

▲

raincole an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think everyone, I mean everyone, has noticed how different GPT-6 sol is from 5.6. Just not the direction OpenAI hoped for.

▲

owebmaster an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think a great model would be replaced in a week.

If the previous one was as good as worth retiring in 7 days, there's a good chance the new one is also not great.