← Back to context

Comment by rootnod3

2 months ago

Sure. I wasn't arguing that OpenAI's naming is better. It is way worse. But Anthropic also doesn't have a sure-fire naming scheme there either.

But it’s still better. Which is the point myself and the GP are making.

It might not be perfect, but it’s still a hell of a lot better.

  • So, 3 arcane barely used words in daily conversation are better than OpenAI's 4, 4o, 5, etc?

    • Yes because 5 is smaller than 4, and 4o isn’t even a number.

      Also, some ChatGPT models include “gpt” in the name. Others do not.

      I cannot guess what model string I need to pass. Whereas with Anthropic I can. And if I have to look it up each time on OpenAIs website, then it’s clearly garbage.

      Also the “arcane barely used” part of your post is entirely subjective. I get you want to make the point that Anthropic naming is poor to support your point about OpenAI, but you’re over exaggerating your point there.

      1 reply →