Comment by jedbrooke

Comment by jedbrooke 3 days ago

25 replies

View on Hacker News

I still don’t know how openAI thought it was a good idea to have a model named "4o" AND a model named "o4", unless the goal was intentional confusion

Someone1234 3 days ago

Even ChatGPT (and certainly Google) confuses the names.

I'm sure there is some internal/academic reason for them, but from an outside observer simply horrible.

Reply View 3 replies
  • jsheard 3 days ago

    Wasn't "ChatGPT" itself only supposed to be a research/academic name, until it unexpectedly broke containment and they ended up having to roll with it? The naming was cursed from the start.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • razodactyl 3 days ago

    How many times have you noticed people confusing the name itself: ChatGBT, ChatGTP etc.

    We're the technical crowd cursed and blinded by knowledge.

    Reply View 0 replies
  • nipponese 3 days ago

    When picking a fight with product marketing, just don't.

    Reply View 0 replies
afro88 3 days ago

Considering how many people say ChatGTP too

Reply View 14 replies
  • uh_uh 3 days ago

    The other day I heard ChatGBD.

    Reply View 9 replies
  • adzm 3 days ago

    GTP goes forward from the middle, teeth, then lips, as compared to GPT which goes middle, lips, teeth; you'll see this pattern happen with a lot of words in linguistic history

    Reply View 0 replies
  • [removed] 3 days ago
    [deleted]
    Reply View 0 replies
  • Insanity 3 days ago

    I’ve been hearing that consistently from a friend, I gave up on correcting them because “ChatGPT” just wouldn’t stick

    Reply View 0 replies
cryptoz 3 days ago

Even more than that, I've seen a lot of people confuse 4 and 4o, probably because 4o sounds like a shorthand for 4.0 which would be the same thing as 4.

Reply View 1 reply
  • mimischi 3 days ago

    Come to think of it, maybe they had a play on 4o being “40”, and o4-mini being “04”, and having to append the “mini” to bring home the message of 04<40

    Reply View 0 replies
pdntspa 3 days ago

It's almost always marketing and some stupid idea someone there had. I don't know why non-technical people try and claim so much ownership over versioning. You nearly always end up with these ridiculous outcomes.

"I know! Let's restart the version numbering for no good reason!" becomes DOOM (2016), Mortal Kombat 1 (2025), Battlefield 1 (2016), Xbox One (not to be confused with the original Xbox 1)

As another example, look at how much of a trainwreck USB 3 has become

Or how Nvidia restarted Geforce card numbering

Reply View 2 replies
  • recursive 3 days ago

    Xbox should be in the hall of fame for terrible names.

    There's also Xbox One X, which is not in the X series. Did I say that right? Playstation got the version numbers right. I couldn't make names as incomprehensible as Xbox if I tried.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • pdntspa 3 days ago

      Rumor has it they were jelly because the Playstation 3 had one higher version number than what would have been the Xbox 2, so it became the Xbox 360 instead. And then got further off the rails when its replacement arrived

      Reply View 0 replies
recursive 3 days ago

"4o" was bad to begin with, as "four-oh" is a common verbalization of "4.0".

Reply View 0 replies