zlacker

I finally caved and started using GPTs daily a couple of days ago.

I went to ask the Internet "best AI tools", and there's no clear consensus:

Various Redditors go on to suggest "here's 100 you might like to try".

So there's clearly a bubble, thousands of startups all trying for similar things.

I am personally looking forward to try Wolfram GPT:

https://www.wolfram.com/wolfram-plugin-chatgpt/

>>sshine+(OP)
I understand there's way too much out there, but I think there is at least some clarity about the landscape at present.

ChatGPT is currently king of the mountain. That could change, but right now that's how it is.

Google's Gemini and Facebook's Llama 3 are clearly in a tier below. The 100s of tools you are seeing are various mixed and matched technologies that also belong in this tier.

Claude (massive context) and Mistral/Mixtral (decent with no censoring/guard rails) are interesting for special cases. And if you're determined and want to put in the effort, you can experiment or self-host and perhaps come up with some capabilities that do something special that suits a use case or something you want to optimize for (although not everyone has time for that).

So I wouldn't say it's just all this one big swirl of confusion and therefore a bubble and due to come crashing down. There's wheat, there's chaff, there's rhyme and reason.

>>glenst+WV
> ChatGPT is currently king of the mountain.

This is completely false. Claude Opus is significantly better than GPT 4.

> Mistral/Mixtral (decent with no censoring/guard rails)

These models have been heavily censored, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Community efforts like Dolphin to fine-tune Mixtral have some success, but no, Karen is definitely still hard at work in France, ensuring that Mistral AI's models don't offend anyone's precious fee-fees.

>>caeril+As1
I think you're missing the forest for the trees here. You're right that Claude Opus is better, which I hadn't known, but I think in your zeal to make that point you're completely forgetting what my comment was about.

It's nevertheless true that there is a coherent landscape of better and worse models, and Chat GPT really does have separation from the other models as I mentioned above. I even mentioned that ChatGPTs position would be subject to change. My understanding is that this most recent version of Claude has been out and about in the wild for perhaps 2 months.

I feel like with even a little bit of charitable interpretation you could read my comment in a way that accounts for the emergence of such a thing as a new and improved model of Claude. So I appreciate your correction but it's hard to see how it amounts to anything more than a drive-by cheap shot that's unrelated to the point I'm making.