alt Hacker NewsNot at all, as long as it's labeled as such. Coming from engineering/science, this is common.
What is bad is starting at 0, showing an indicator of a gap, and suddenly starting at 30 or whatever after the gap.
Not at all, as long as it's labeled as such. Coming from engineering/science, this is common.
What is bad is starting at 0, showing an indicator of a gap, and suddenly starting at 30 or whatever after the gap.
It gives you a wrong perspective, especially if you are distracted, on model capabilities: Fable 5.1 is not 30% better than Sol, but is the very first impression you get when you look at the first graph.
If I'm not wrong OAI tried a similar trick when GPT5 was announced ... they have been criticized a lot.