Live data from Hacker News

Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

openai.com

391–400 of 797 posts

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#391
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thankfully he didn't say that they're all like that. Instead he pointed out the few that are as a well known example of similar behavior. If you reread the comment with a fresh mind you'll notice that you misunderstood what he wrote

When attacking archetypes of people, there is some responsibility to make clear who you’re attacking and why, even to someone who’s not being hyper-open-minded. At least if you want them to learn from you: which may or may not be your goal. When you attack/signal you’re on the offensive, it is foolish to believe that they won’t knee-jerk attack back and become closed minded at least a little. Regardless, the “misinte…

You used a lot of words to defend a strawman argument

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#392
post #3

Other than the worst naming I have ever seen (Sol / Terra / Luna), the pricing is still expensive: > GPT‑5.6 is priced per 1M tokens across three model sizes: > Sol is $5 input / $30 output; > Terra is $2.50 input / $15 output > Luna is $1 input / $6 output. The OpenAI casino has never been more ready to take your money on gambling even more tokens.

Don't forget this.

> For GPT‑5.6 and later models, cache writes are billed at 1.25x the model’s uncached input rate

Charging for cache writes is cringe and literally only Anthropic did it. Anyway this does mean the "real" prices are +25% on top of what you wrote there.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#393
post #44

I think GPT writes code the best. How well will it write in version 5.6? It gives me chills. Recently, I went head-to-head with GPT on nearly 2,000 lines of code, and GPT's solution was superior and faster. I even referenced multiple codebases on GitHub while trying, but they were incomparable to GPT. So using GPT brings both fear and excitement. The fear comes from realizing that this level of code is now the averag…

[deleted]

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Unless you're running Linux yourself, it can absolutely be taken away.

Yes. The difference is obviously that full, fat Linux runs on a superset of anything a layperson would call a computer, and can be built from source on roughly the same set of hardware. Running the full, fat Deepseek (as in the 1.6T model, unquantized) is too big to run on anything a layperson would call a computer, and being able to actually build it is even harder.

It's famously difficult to find people willing to rent you time on big computers over the internet.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#395
post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a certain rate we will be able to move towards continuous / real-time inference systems. The discrete, turn based solutions are quite confining with how they must be trained. Continuous and real-time would fundamentally alter the domain. From an information theory perspective we are still in dial-up territory with regard to the actual information rate. 750 tokens per second would be a really bad dialup connection.…

Your comment made me think of another real time. Real time, dynamic code/apis. Imagine a world where there is no code, just things mildly handshaking and then creating data APIs on the fly. Where communication is fuzzy and locked in on an individual basis. No years of RFCs, no RFCs at all, just... data. Just data, man. An API arbitration aberratically assigned at authorized access, abridged and annotated, analyticall…

I’ve thought about this before. No flaky config files, no updating endpoints, no status monitors. Just fuzzy everything that works almost all of the time.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#396
post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a certain rate we will be able to move towards continuous / real-time inference systems. The discrete, turn based solutions are quite confining with how they must be trained. Continuous and real-time would fundamentally alter the domain. From an information theory perspective we are still in dial-up territory with regard to the actual information rate. 750 tokens per second would be a really bad dialup connection.…

Your comment made me think of another real time. Real time, dynamic code/apis. Imagine a world where there is no code, just things mildly handshaking and then creating data APIs on the fly. Where communication is fuzzy and locked in on an individual basis. No years of RFCs, no RFCs at all, just... data. Just data, man. An API arbitration aberratically assigned at authorized access, abridged and annotated, analyticall…

Wow. Sci-fi stuff!

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By definition, 50% of developers are below average, so there are indeed "tons of folks" who are not very good at what they do.

That is not how averages work. By definition of mean, perhaps.

That is how a median is defined, not the mean.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#399
post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a certain rate we will be able to move towards continuous / real-time inference systems. The discrete, turn based solutions are quite confining with how they must be trained. Continuous and real-time would fundamentally alter the domain. From an information theory perspective we are still in dial-up territory with regard to the actual information rate. 750 tokens per second would be a really bad dialup connection.…

Your comment made me think of another real time. Real time, dynamic code/apis. Imagine a world where there is no code, just things mildly handshaking and then creating data APIs on the fly. Where communication is fuzzy and locked in on an individual basis. No years of RFCs, no RFCs at all, just... data. Just data, man. An API arbitration aberratically assigned at authorized access, abridged and annotated, analyticall…

It's very easy to see how world changing this technology will be. In a few years these AIs are going to be negotiating how they communicate with each other. Humans won't necessarily be included in that negotiation unless we have some kind of specific reason to. So many communication layers are going to be opaque to humans. We just have to trust our AIs are communicating efficiently and safely.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#400
post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahh yes slop at the speed of light, how useful!

AI is improving and seems to be reaching the point of not being slop (I am talking about flagship models).

If you’re still calling it slop at this point you have an axe to grind.
Post reply on HN