OpenAI is not a serious company | Hacker News Reader

OpenAI is not a serious company

13 pointsjohnnyApplePRNG14 comments

Let's be clear, OpenAI's models are phenomenal. GPT-5 is already solving problems I couldn't get any other model to touch. For that, kudos.

But as a platform for developers, ChatGPT is a joke.

I'm staring at a massive file it just generated, and I can't collapse it. This is a basic feature, maybe 10 lines of JavaScript, that would make the tool infinitely more usable. Instead, my middle finger is getting a workout from all the scrolling, and I'm starting to consider using it for something more sinister.

This isn't just a minor annoyance; it's a symptom of a larger problem: OpenAI is coasting on its early success and completely ignoring the developer experience. Meanwhile, competitors are eating their lunch.

I look at Claude's Artifacts system and it's miles ahead. It's clear other companies are actually thinking about the developer's workflow. It feels like OpenAI is so high on their own supply they've forgotten that people actually have to use the thing.

So, while they've built some of the most powerful models, they are failing to build a platform that respects a developer's time and workflow. They are not a serious company when it comes to serving the developer community.

TL;DR My fingers hurt ... at the very least, can you stop forcing us to scroll hundreds of times per response?

Well, by this logic , no companies on earth is a serious company. eg Google is not a "serious company". on mobile broswer, if you search for videos and click on the link, it always shows this stupid "Sign in to confirm that you're not a bot", (i already signed in) i need to click "visit" everytime. You can find many small stupid issues for every company such as apple , google or facebook.

ChatGPT is basically just one single product though... a chat interface.

Google is myriad things.

In this argument, you are selling OpenAI a bit short.

Yes, that is exactly right. Those exact companies aren't serious companies.

Developers aren't the target audience for ChatGPT. Why aren't you using their API? It's trivial to generate the type of experience you're looking for. If you're a developer...then develop!

I paid them something like $1k for the business plan for me and my partner for the year and there are no api credits that come with that, unfortunately.

I have used their API for plenty of things already... just not coding.

Realistically, most developers aren't going to roll their own API IDEs.

Are you using codex? They have a cli and a VSC extension.

Or are you using the web ui?

It's time to switch to the API, then. Not to be glib about it, but an API powered experience where you control the front-end is far more controllable and stable than ChatGPT, which you have no control over.

I get the vibe that they're all very aware of how deep into plateau territory they are, with no clear path toward the AGI they've been lying about for a few years, so now they're trying to come up with ways to keep the hype train going as long as possible before the inevitable implosion. Collapsible textareas would be sweet, but their valuations are based on this AGI carrot they've been dangling in front of investors (and terrorizing the working class with). I'd love to hear what kinds of conversations are going on behind the scenes.

Sora 2 seemed like a pure hype move. There's no way they're bringing in even a tiny fraction of the revenue needed to cover the cost of it, but the videos do get a lot of viral attention. Investors probably arent actually using Sora 2, but they do see the rare watchable video when it pops off on social media.

Gen AI seems like the perfect tech to dupe non-tech or low-tech investors into believing they're building something intelligent. I can't think of any technology I've ever used that leaves such a disproportionally good first impression, while dramatically overselling its capabilities. If you put it in the hands of a non-tech investor who sort of knows how to code, he's going to ask it to do some truly trivial shit. And he's going to be amazed when it regurgitates some absurdly common pattern he could have Googled and found in one click. The real trade secret is that people just don't understand that any time LLMs seem intelligent, it's because they're regurgitating the work of intelligent humans (who almost certainly were not compensated for, or even aware of, their work being used in the training set).

LLMs are pretty neat, I use them daily for work. But the whole AGI grift and AI doom scenario we keep getting threatened with is really overshadowing the novelty of what is an often (situationally) useful, neat tool that makes me a little more productive some of the time.

Honestly, it's this squeezing every last drop from the hype train that really bothers me. A. The setup makes the eventual implosion that much more painful for the whole economy than if they let it go the natural course. B. Haven't you gotten enough already? You really really need to suck the whole economy dry before the thing lands?

Oh I'm sure they'll also demand bailouts... because... China

ChatGPT is not a platform for developers. You are using the wrong tool.

And you are using it incorrectly even if it were the right tool. If you have a trivial function to write that should be 10 lines of code, why are you having AI do it in the first place? Just code it. Or, if you really want AI to do that for you and must have a short simple function, say so in your prompt - it will comply.

The chat interface has regrettably become the universal mold for LLM interaction. There are no dissenters. Every provider has the exact same experience. Just off the top of my head I can think of more than a dozen different features that would make LLM interactions infinitely more intuitive and efficient.

They don’t have search functionality for chatgpt chat logs… Like the most basic feature. And lots and lots of bugs in the web and app user interfaces. Lots of people still using it though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com