[falcor84]

While this seems to be a legitimately strong technical achievement pushing the SotA, I can't help but feel that it's cheapened by the use of the word "Deep" and the way in which their "Deep research" button seems to be a UI copy of Deepseek's "DeepThink" button.

Am I right that at least from a marketing standpoint, it appears that OpenAI are now on the defensive?

[ggm]

I think you are right. Having somebody release service with claims of 10x efficiency rather knocks a hole in messaging about your super-large capex to deliver things. (I thought to the contrary but it's been pointed out to me you probably cannot deliver 10x (financial) outcome on that investment.)

I harp on a lot in HN about the value of adjectives, and words as simile. I look at "deep" and thinks its value is close to "nice" -it doesn't actually mean much more than "please like me"

I'd almost say belief that this is deep, is a .. "hallucination"

I think if you treat "deep" as a noun: It's "my company" flagging. This is OpenAI research. It's depth, is not defined as "deep"

[irs]

Apparently, even google used a similar term for Gemini back in December. https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/11/gemini-can-now-research-de...

[InkCanon]

I think they definitely are. To customers, there's close to zero perceptible benefit when X model scores significantly higher on some benchmark they never heard of (or even know what is about). So they're desperately trying to make it different in some way.