3 ms·
> My experience so far is that waiting a long time is annoying, sufficiently annoying that you often won’t want to wait. My solution for this has been to use n
by iLoveOncall 1y ago
> My experience so far is that waiting a long time is annoying, sufficiently annoying that you often won’t want to wait.
My solution for this has been to use non-reasoning models, and so far in 90% of the situations I have received the exact same results from both.
- jasonjmcghee 1y agoOn the complete other end of the spectrum, I found deep research (whether it's actually performing searches or not) to be a significant upgrade in quality. But you need to be cool with having to wait 15-30 minutes. It's certainly not for everything, but definitely worth trying. It tends to output significantly longer and more detailed output. So when you want that kind of thing- works well. Especially if you need up to date stuff or want to find related sources.
- pinoy420 1y ago[dead]
- joshstrange 1y agoDeep research is very cool, no doubt, but run it on a problem space you are familiar with and you will see the shortcomings. Anytime I do my own “deep” research I like to then throw the same problem at OpenAI and see how well it fares. Often it misses things or gets things subtly wrong. The results look impressive so it’s easy to fool people and I’m not saying the results are useless, I’ve absolutely gotten value out of it, but I don’t love using it for anything I actually care about.
- bcrosby95 1y agoI view the results more as a starting point than an end unto itself. For that I think it's pretty useful.
- matwood 1y agoSame, it will pull enough sources together that I end up with an idea of where to go next.
- joshstrange 1y agoAbsolutely, I agree it's useful as a starting point, sometimes it's all I need (if it's low-stakes and I just wanted a bit more data). I was just cautioning "trusting" it completely, since it's very easy to fall into that trap (I've done it).