armistace/blog
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Human edits to GPT-OSS Is it EEE

Browse Source 
had to make some edits to the article and add the human intro
This commit is contained in:
armistace 2025-08-14 11:41:46 +10:00
parent a3efb5128d
commit f7cd3f7ba7
1 changed files with 31 additions and 10 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

41
src/content/gpt_oss__is_it_eee.md
View File

@ -1,8 +1,29 @@
Title: GPT OSS - Is It Embrace, Extend, Extenguish
Date: 2025-08-12 20:00
Modified: 2025-08-14 20:00
Category: Politics, Tech, AI
Tags: politics, tech, Ai
Slug: social-media-ban-fail
Authors: Andrew Ridgway
Summary: GPT OSS is here from Open AI, the first open weight model from them since GPT-2. My question is... why now?
# Human Introduction
This has been a tough one for the publishing house to get right. I've had it generate 3 different drafts and this is still the result of quite the edit. Today's blog was written by:
1. Gemma:27b - Editor
2. GPT-OSS - Journalist
3. Qwen3:14b - Journalist
4. phi4:latest - Journalist
5. deepseek-r1:14b - journalist
The big change from last time is the addition of gpt-oss, which is of course the focus of hte topic today. It's quite the open weight model, haven't played with the tooling yet but I'm exceited to see what it can do, even if I do have questions.
Anyways, without further ado! GPT-OSS is it EEE? written by AI... For AI?
# GPT OSS - Is It EEE?
## Introduction: The Return of OpenAI (With Some Questions)
This week, the AI world got a bit busier than usual. OpenAI dropped their long-awaited **GPT-OSS** models, and it feels like they’re trying to make up for lost time—or maybe just remind everyone that they’re still in the game. The release has sparked a lot of excitement, but also some confusion. Are these models really as good as they claim? And why now? Let’s break this down with all the drama, intrigue, and a dash of humor you’ve come to expect from your friendly neighborhood tech writer.
This week, the AI world got a bit busier than usual. OpenAI dropped their [**GPT-OSS**](https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-oss/) models, and it feels like they’re trying to make up for lost time—or maybe just remind everyone that they’re still in the game. The release has sparked a lot of excitement, but also some confusion. Are these models really as good as they claim? And why now? Let’s break this down with all the drama, intrigue, and a dash of humor you’ve come to expect from your friendly neighborhood tech writer.
## What Exactly Is GPT-OSS Anyway?
@ -19,8 +40,8 @@ Over the past year or so, the AI community has been moving away from GPT-based m
* **Google’s Gemini (Gemma)** series
* **Microsoft’s Phi** series (yes, that Microsoft—ironically, OpenAI is a subsidiary)
* The **Qwen** series from DeepSeek
* And others like **Llama** and **Vicuna**
* The **Qwen** series
* And others like **Llama** and **Deepseek**
These models have been a breath of fresh air for developers. They’re free to use, tweak, and integrate into projects without worrying about pesky API limits or astronomical costs. It’s like the AI world finally got its own version of Linux—except with neural networks. But then OpenAI showed up with GPT-OSS. And now everyone is asking: Why?
@ -31,8 +52,8 @@ Ah, the classic **Embrace, Extend, Extinguish** strategy. If you’re not famili
Now, I’m not accusing OpenAI of anything here—just pointing out that they’re a Microsoft subsidiary, and Microsoft has a history of such strategies. Whether this is intentional or just good business sense is up for debate. But let’s think about it:
* OpenAI has dominated the consumer AI market with their **ChatGPT** and other tools.
* They’ve been losing ground in the developer market, where models like Gemini and Claude (Anthropic) are gaining traction.
* Now they’re releasing open-source models that promise to compete at GPT-4 levels.
* They’ve been losing ground in the developer market, where models like [Gemini](https://deepmind.google/models/gemini/pro/) and particularly [Claude (Anthropic)](https://claude.ai/) are gaining traction in the proprietary space.
* Now they’re releasing open-source models that promise to compete at GPT-4 levels to try and bring in the Deepseek and Qwen crowd.
The timing feels a bit too convenient. OpenAI is essentially saying: “We get it. You want local, affordable, and flexible AI? We’ve got you covered.” But will this be enough to win back the developer community? Or are they just delaying the inevitable?
@ -44,22 +65,22 @@ Let’s not sugarcoat it: For developers, the real value of AI isn’t in chatbo
* Automating customer support with natural language processing.
* Creating dynamic content for apps and websites on the fly.
This is where AI shines—and where OpenAI has been dropping the ball. Their focus on consumer-facing tools like ChatGPT has made them a household name, but it’s also left developers feeling overlooked. Now, with GPT-OSS, OpenAI is trying to bridge that gap. But will they succeed? Or are they just too late to the party?
This is where AI shines—and where OpenAI has been losing market and mind share. Their focus on consumer-facing tools like ChatGPT has made them a household name, but it’s also left developers feeling overlooked. Now, with GPT-OSS, OpenAI is trying to bridge that gap. But will they succeed? Or are they just too late to the party?
## The Dark Side of Monocultures
One thing I’m deeply concerned about is the potential for a monoculture in AI. If OpenAI manages to dominate the open-source space with GPT-OSS, we could end up in a world where everyone uses variations of the same model. It’s not just about vendor lock-in—it’s about stifling innovation. When every developer uses the same tools and approaches, we lose the diversity that drives progress.
I want to see a future where there are **multiple open-source models**, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. That way, developers can choose what works best for their needs instead of being forced into one ecosystem.
I want to see a future where there are **multiple open-source or at the very least open weight models**, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. That way, developers can choose what works best for their needs instead of being forced into one ecosystem.
## Testing the Waters: My Journey With GPT-OSS
As I sit here typing this blog post, I’m using a model very similar to GPT-oss-20b as my AI assistant. It’s fast, it’s local, and it’s surprisingly good at generating content. But is it better than alternatives like Claude or Gemini? That’s the million-dollar question.
This blog post was partly written by GPT-oss-20b. It’s fast, it’s local, and it’s surprisingly good at generating content. But is it better than open weight alternatives like Deepseek or Gemma (the open weight gemini)? That’s the million-dollar question.
I’ve spent the past few weeks testing out various models for my own projects, and I can say this much: GPT-OSS feels like a solid contender. It’s fast, easy to integrate, and—dare I say it—fun to work with. But until I put it head-to-head with other models, I won’t be ready to crown it the king of AI.
I’ve been testing out various models for my own projects, and I can say this much: GPT-OSS feels like a solid contender. It’s fast, easy to integrate, and—dare I say it—fun to work with. But until I put it head-to-head with other models, I won’t be ready to crown it the king of AI.
## Final Thoughts: The Future of AI is in Our Hands
The release of GPT-OSS is a big deal—not just for OpenAI, but for the entire AI community. It’s a reminder that even closed-source giants can (and should) listen to their users. But let’s not get carried away. OpenAI isn’t the only game in town anymore. Models like Gemini, Claude, and Qwen are proving that diversity is key to innovation.
The release of GPT-OSS is a big deal—not just for OpenAI, but for the entire AI community. It’s a reminder that even closed-source giants can (and should) listen to their users. But let’s not get carried away. OpenAI isn’t the only game in town anymore. Models like Gemini, Claude in the proprietary space, and Qwen and Llama in open source space are proving that diversity is key to innovation.
As developers, we have the power to choose which models succeed—and by extension, shape the future of AI. Let’s make sure we’re making choices that benefit the community as a whole, not just a single company. After all, the last thing we need is another **AI monoculture**.