6 ms·

ChatGPT is NOT a LLM – GPT is

18 points by vincirufus 1y ago

Alifatisk 1y ago
Right, ChatGPT now with GPT-5 has become some sort of router to different suitable models
tonkinai 1y ago
ChatGPT is a wrapper of GPT
- Retr0id 1y ago
  And Google is a wrapper of PageRank
  - pwython 1y ago
    And HN is a wrapper of bikeshedding.
    - falcor84 1y ago
      And a bikeshed is a wrapper of a bike
      - dijksterhuis 1y ago
        And a bike is a wrapper of wheels
      - jemiluv8 1y ago
        And a bike is a wrapper of wheels
- vincirufus 1y ago
  It used to be a thin wrapper, but todays chatGPT is closer to an agent
vinniedkator 1y ago
“This stateless nature isn’t a bug - it’s a feature. It makes LLMs: Predictable: Same input always produces consistent output” There is no always.
j_crick 1y ago
You forgot to mention that this post was written by Opus
- vincirufus 1y ago
  Sadly I don't have a Claude subscription for the number of tokens needed for Opus. Although I'd admit I used Sonnet to clean up and improve the language and grammar.
tantalor 1y ago
This is just semantic pedantry.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
sails 1y ago
> The key insight: when you interact with modern ChatGPT, you’re not just talking to a language model - you’re collaborating with an intelligent agent that uses language models as one component of a much more sophisticated cognitive architecture that includes memory, tools, and orchestration. Fwiw, right at the end
xp84 1y ago
“This isn’t just about keeping a chat history - it’s about building and maintaining a model of the user, the task, and the evolving context.” Was this written by GPT? ;)
bakugo 1y ago
> This stateless nature isn’t a bug - it’s a feature > This isn’t just about keeping a chat history - it’s about building and maintaining a model > Understanding this distinction isn’t just about getting the terminology right. It’s about understanding the future of human-computer interaction > When we say “ChatGPT” when we mean “LLM,” we’re not just being sloppy - we’re obscuring fundamental architectural and strategic decisions > when you interact with modern ChatGPT, you’re not just talking to a language model - you’re collaborating with an intelligent agent No comment.
jemiluv8 1y ago
And there goes the enshitification of all that was good about blog posts: human element.
- vincirufus 1y ago
  Well there was is a lot of human element and infact this post was an output of conversations with different people talking about LLM and ChatGPT. I guess Claude over did the 'fix grammar and improve the language' instructions.
  - jemiluv8 1y ago
    My bad. It just had too much of the llm vibe about it.
trjordan 1y ago
AI sloppiness of this blog post aside, it's a reasonable observation. If you're thinking about how to integrate AI into your system, it's worth asking the question of why your system isn't just ChatGPT. - Do you have unique data you can pass as context? - Do you have APIs or actions that are awkward to teach to other systems via MCP? - Do you have a unique viewpoint that you are writing into your system prompt? - Do you have a way to structure stored information that's more valuable than freeform text memories? - etc. For instance, we [0] are writing an agent that helps you plan migrations. You can do this with ChatGPT, but it hugely benefits from (in descending order of uniqueness) access to 1) a structured memory that's a cross between Asana and the output of `grep` in a spreadsheet, 2) a bunch of best-practice instructions on how to prep your codebase for a migration, and 3) the AI code assistant-style tools like ls, find, bash, etc. So yeah, we're writing at agent, not building a model. And I'm not worried about ChatGPT doing this, despite the fact that GPT5 is pretty good at it. [0] https://tern.sh https://tern.sh
mehulashah 1y ago
I like this post. I see this confusion all the time! What’s the difference between ChatGPT and gpt-5 or gpt-4o, and so on. OpenAI’s carefully crafted naming schemes don’t help. Though, I come from AWS so glass houses. Anyway, agents are control systems that using planning, tools, and a collection of underlying models. ChatGPT is an agent. What kind? The kind optimized for the general user looking to do work with public knowledge. That’s the best definition I can come up with. Anyway, let’s make sure people understand the difference between AI systems and AI models. The former is where a lot of startup activity will be for a decade. The latter will be in the hands of a few well funded behemoths.
elaus 1y ago
This is becoming a problem for me: I like to use LibreChat to interface LLMs (Gemini, GPT-x), because it allows me to pay by usage (instead of 20+ USD per month) and keep a (tiny bit) more of the data under my control. But the offerings of ChatGPT or Google's AI Studio surpass the feature set of LibreChat by a lot. It used to be just a "better" system prompt, but now it's a lot more.
- vincirufus 1y ago
  Yup exactly!! its a subtle change happening under the hood, When people have a good interaction with ChatGPT they attribute it to the LLM, but in most cases, its the agentic features in ChatGPT that wows you and not necessarily the smartness of the large language model.
satisfice 1y ago
Call it GenAI. It’s not acting as an agent unless it does something in the world on your behalf.

18 points by vincirufus 1y ago

Alifatisk 1y ago

Right, ChatGPT now with GPT-5 has become some sort of router to different suitable models

tonkinai 1y ago

ChatGPT is a wrapper of GPT

Retr0id 1y ago
And Google is a wrapper of PageRank
- pwython 1y ago
  And HN is a wrapper of bikeshedding.
  - falcor84 1y ago
    And a bikeshed is a wrapper of a bike
    - dijksterhuis 1y ago
      And a bike is a wrapper of wheels
    - jemiluv8 1y ago
      And a bike is a wrapper of wheels
vincirufus 1y ago
It used to be a thin wrapper, but todays chatGPT is closer to an agent

vinniedkator 1y ago

“This stateless nature isn’t a bug - it’s a feature. It makes LLMs: Predictable: Same input always produces consistent output” There is no always.

j_crick 1y ago

You forgot to mention that this post was written by Opus

vincirufus 1y ago
Sadly I don't have a Claude subscription for the number of tokens needed for Opus. Although I'd admit I used Sonnet to clean up and improve the language and grammar.

tantalor 1y ago

This is just semantic pedantry.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

sails 1y ago

> The key insight: when you interact with modern ChatGPT, you’re not just talking to a language model - you’re collaborating with an intelligent agent that uses language models as one component of a much more sophisticated cognitive architecture that includes memory, tools, and orchestration. Fwiw, right at the end

xp84 1y ago

“This isn’t just about keeping a chat history - it’s about building and maintaining a model of the user, the task, and the evolving context.” Was this written by GPT? ;)

bakugo 1y ago

> This stateless nature isn’t a bug - it’s a feature > This isn’t just about keeping a chat history - it’s about building and maintaining a model > Understanding this distinction isn’t just about getting the terminology right. It’s about understanding the future of human-computer interaction > When we say “ChatGPT” when we mean “LLM,” we’re not just being sloppy - we’re obscuring fundamental architectural and strategic decisions > when you interact with modern ChatGPT, you’re not just talking to a language model - you’re collaborating with an intelligent agent No comment.

jemiluv8 1y ago

And there goes the enshitification of all that was good about blog posts: human element.

vincirufus 1y ago
Well there was is a lot of human element and infact this post was an output of conversations with different people talking about LLM and ChatGPT. I guess Claude over did the 'fix grammar and improve the language' instructions.
- jemiluv8 1y ago
  My bad. It just had too much of the llm vibe about it.

trjordan 1y ago

AI sloppiness of this blog post aside, it's a reasonable observation. If you're thinking about how to integrate AI into your system, it's worth asking the question of why your system isn't just ChatGPT. - Do you have unique data you can pass as context? - Do you have APIs or actions that are awkward to teach to other systems via MCP? - Do you have a unique viewpoint that you are writing into your system prompt? - Do you have a way to structure stored information that's more valuable than freeform text memories? - etc. For instance, we [0] are writing an agent that helps you plan migrations. You can do this with ChatGPT, but it hugely benefits from (in descending order of uniqueness) access to 1) a structured memory that's a cross between Asana and the output of `grep` in a spreadsheet, 2) a bunch of best-practice instructions on how to prep your codebase for a migration, and 3) the AI code assistant-style tools like ls, find, bash, etc. So yeah, we're writing at agent, not building a model. And I'm not worried about ChatGPT doing this, despite the fact that GPT5 is pretty good at it. [0] https://tern.sh https://tern.sh

mehulashah 1y ago

I like this post. I see this confusion all the time! What’s the difference between ChatGPT and gpt-5 or gpt-4o, and so on. OpenAI’s carefully crafted naming schemes don’t help. Though, I come from AWS so glass houses. Anyway, agents are control systems that using planning, tools, and a collection of underlying models. ChatGPT is an agent. What kind? The kind optimized for the general user looking to do work with public knowledge. That’s the best definition I can come up with. Anyway, let’s make sure people understand the difference between AI systems and AI models. The former is where a lot of startup activity will be for a decade. The latter will be in the hands of a few well funded behemoths.

elaus 1y ago

This is becoming a problem for me: I like to use LibreChat to interface LLMs (Gemini, GPT-x), because it allows me to pay by usage (instead of 20+ USD per month) and keep a (tiny bit) more of the data under my control. But the offerings of ChatGPT or Google's AI Studio surpass the feature set of LibreChat by a lot. It used to be just a "better" system prompt, but now it's a lot more.

vincirufus 1y ago
Yup exactly!! its a subtle change happening under the hood, When people have a good interaction with ChatGPT they attribute it to the LLM, but in most cases, its the agentic features in ChatGPT that wows you and not necessarily the smartness of the large language model.

satisfice 1y ago

Call it GenAI. It’s not acting as an agent unless it does something in the world on your behalf.