In fact Greg Brockman explicitly said they are considering changing the release schedule in a way that could be interpreted as opening the door for a different versioning scheme.
And actually there is no law or anything that says that any particular change or improvement to the model or even new training run that necessities them calling it version 5. It's not like there is a Version Release Police that evaluates all of the version numbers and puts people in jail if they don't adhere to some specific consistent scheme.
> "it’s easy to create a continuum of incrementally-better AIs (such as by deploying subsequent checkpoints of a given training run), which presents a safety opportunity very unlike our historical approach of infrequent major model upgrades."
In fact Greg Brockman explicitly said they are considering changing the release schedule in a way that could be interpreted as opening the door for a different versioning scheme.
And actually there is no law or anything that says that any particular change or improvement to the model or even new training run that necessities them calling it version 5. It's not like there is a Version Release Police that evaluates all of the version numbers and puts people in jail if they don't adhere to some specific consistent scheme.
> In fact Greg Brockman explicitly said
source?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35548962
> "it’s easy to create a continuum of incrementally-better AIs (such as by deploying subsequent checkpoints of a given training run), which presents a safety opportunity very unlike our historical approach of infrequent major model upgrades."
Maybe they’ll pull an MS and go straight to GPT X
The famous Microsoft numbering system! I think we should all skip GPT-Vista, but I can't wait for GPT-7.
As long as it is not GPT-ME
GPT-360
GPT-One