Though I will continue to insist that the path we were on would have been much clearer if o3 had been called GPT-5 and GPT-5 had been called…

Ethan Mollick comments on OpenAI's naming convention for their AI models, specifically critiquing the decision to call the o3 model "o3" rather than "GPT-5," suggesting the naming scheme creates confusion about the product line's progression. The post implies that clearer naming would better communicate the capabilities and positioning of different model releases.

Source: Ethan Mollick (X) | 2026-05-22