C’mon. OpenAI is a large company now with 1000+ employees. You’re really going to air this hot take?
- if they release a model “they’re just releasing models without use cases”
- if they release safety guardrails “they are just doing this to avoid launching models”
- if the release has a waitlist “they’re losing their velocity”
- if they launch without a waitlist “they weren’t considering the safety implications”
- if they hired a top researcher “they’re conspiring to out spend open source”
- if they fire a top researcher “there’s too much politics taking over”
Probably because the benchmarks with higher models are, at this time, negligible. Increasing transformers and iterating attention might be a dead-stop for more capable models beyond 2T parameters. But, I'm not sure.
To what extent 4o is a new model or a refinement depends on:
a) technology
b) thresholds for what it means for a model to be "new"
Not naming.
We have no clue about what happens within the super-secretive ironically-named OpenAI. To me, it feels like a new model. To you, it feels like a refinement. Unless one of us has insider information, I'm not sure it's worth disputing. We have a difference of opinion, and likely, neither of us has anything to back it up.
- if they release a model “they’re just releasing models without use cases” - if they release safety guardrails “they are just doing this to avoid launching models” - if the release has a waitlist “they’re losing their velocity” - if they launch without a waitlist “they weren’t considering the safety implications” - if they hired a top researcher “they’re conspiring to out spend open source” - if they fire a top researcher “there’s too much politics taking over”