Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 433 posts

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#271

Post by drdexebtjl »

rahidz wrote: post #249
rowanG077 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big problem is that a person making a mistake can be taught to not make that mistake again. That's also not foolproof but at least it works a lot of the times. AI are unteachable, if you have given them a good prompt and they do something wrong 90% of the time you are shit out of luck. That is to say I do agree that building reliable processes out of unreliable parts with feedback is the modus operandi. However A…

"AI are unteachable, if you have given them a good prompt and they do something wrong 90% of the time you are shit out of luck." please take a look at the error(s) made in the prior run. what could've been done better? create or modify an existing skill to emphasize this, or suggest additional language in AGENTS.md.

It will return a bunch of relevant-sounding insight, modify skills and context files… Then do the same error again.

We’re not at the point where AI is capable of knowing what went wrong and self-aware enough to understand how it could reliably change its own behavior.

For months I’ve been trying to have the agents stop manually writing our auto-generated SQL migrations and run the command that generates them instead. SOTA models insist on occasionally getting it wrong.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#272

Post by whstl »

tmountain wrote: post #178
whstl wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The craziest to me was someone saying “we are using AI in daily processes, now we need to automate”. But of course to some asshole non-technical people it meant asking for their vibe coded bullshit to be merged into production without review and fighting about it.

The craziest for me is companies that sticking stochastic agents into automated business processes and expecting stable/reliable outcomes. Businesses want deterministic processes in the vast majority of cases.

"Business processes" can also mean "building power point decks" and other things.

But your point stands: for critical business processes that need predictability, we indeed need determinism.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#273

Post by reinitctxoffset »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #231
reinitctxoffset wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Trump administration decides to annoint Altman and Amodei in defiance of market forces it will rapidly discover that it no longer has the sovereign bond auction pricing power to prop them up. This isn't 1998: the Treasury has taken five major body blows in the last 25 years, the world's energy markets, maritime insurance regimes, electronic payments rails, and moral authority in places like the UN Security Cou…

It is in OpenAI, Anthropic, and the US Gov's best interest to slow China down and ban Chinese models. Literally none of what you wrote prevents them from doing so. Once China starts to get scary, Commerce will export control GPUs and declare Chinese models "foreign munitions." Any nation doing business with the US will not be allowed to use these models either, and that will be the end of that. It is just not in the…

The assertion that it's in the United States Government's best interests ban Chinese open weight models is a very strong opinion that is not a consensus even at the fringe of Thiel-adjacent psycho thought: Alex Karp is on record about open weight models being necessary, the fucking "we bombed a bunch of kids with Claude doing rubber stamp target selection" guy. He thinks "trust OpenAI and Anthropic" is a radical position.

Peter Hegseth, another really pro-America being powerful guy, he's dealing with a lawsuit because he doesn't want Anthropic in his military, he calls it a supply chain risk (he's right).

There is no evidence of any kind that a complex attack vector can be trained into model weights and survive all the crazy slicing and dicing that happens between published weights and running model. These things get quantized and run on mathematically imprecise kernels and sampled and LoRA-tuned and Dolphin/Orca de-tuned. Go look at what the ComfyUI community comes up with, those guys know more about WAN 2.2 than the people who trained it. Because those models run for real on a desktop, so there's mad innovation at light speed.

There is no one who wants a capriciously expensive black box run by extremely creepy people, not once the capability crosses over (in about November).

But don't take my word for it, you just had a chance at one AI IPO, and I'm sure you'll get another, so if you like how that goes, you don't need to convince me!

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#274

Post by alightsoul »

stingraycharles wrote: post #195
layla5alive wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.ph/NEwVz "However, these inference optimizations, which rival Anthropic refers to as “compute multipliers,” are a big focus for all the labs. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has been publicly talking about the concept since at least mid-2023, when he said on a podcast that the company limits “the number of people who are aware of a given compute multiplier” because it could give other AI labs a leg up if t…

Ok I’m not sure I follow your point here. Isn’t all that he’s saying that if they find some optimization techniques, that gives them an edge? And that makes sense? How is this suddenly evidence of him being a villain?

The evidence is that unlike Deepseek he does not publish his compute multipliers. Under that argument Deepseek should not publish any of their research either.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#276

Post by alightsoul »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #221
stingraycharles wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok I’m not sure I follow your point here. Isn’t all that he’s saying that if they find some optimization techniques, that gives them an edge? And that makes sense? How is this suddenly evidence of him being a villain?

It has got to be one of the most insane takes I've read on HN, which to be fair has been trending towards "unhinged" when it comes to Anthropic and AI safety. Compute multipliers are like a quant firm's trading algorithms. They're the crown jewels, the whole alpha of the lab. If you leak them, the lab dies. Protecting them does not make Dario a villain, it's literally his job. It's also Sam's job, Denis's job, Mira's…

So how can Deepseek publish them without killing themselves?

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#277

Post by alightsoul »

bloppe wrote: post #139
layla5alive wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.ph/NEwVz "However, these inference optimizations, which rival Anthropic refers to as “compute multipliers,” are a big focus for all the labs. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has been publicly talking about the concept since at least mid-2023, when he said on a podcast that the company limits “the number of people who are aware of a given compute multiplier” because it could give other AI labs a leg up if t…

I agree that Dario is pretty annoying, but I think the "tech villain" archetype is essentially survivorship bias. The tech leaders who don't act that way are not nearly as visible because they're not nearly as successful.

How are the Chinese doing it then? It's not a zero sum game is it?

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#278

Post by petesergeant »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #141
bloppe wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that Dario is pretty annoying, but I think the "tech villain" archetype is essentially survivorship bias. The tech leaders who don't act that way are not nearly as visible because they're not nearly as successful.

HN is just a massive Anthropic hate fest now, probably funded/manipulated by OAI's $8B PR budget. OP phrases it as a bad thing that Dario is keeping compute multipliers to Anthropic. How naive can one be? Compute multipliers are the whole business. Those are the trade secrets every lab is built on. It is the alpha of the business. How does protecting this make Dario evil? This website is getting out of hand with the…

I'm not as conspiratorial as you, but it does seem the tide of opinion here is turning against Amodei, for no particularly obvious external reason. At the same time, there does seem to be at least some evidence of adversarial attempts to oppose data-centers by America's competitors.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#279

Post by bobkb »

throw394042 wrote: post #30

I'm working in large US corporation. And I see that I already have access to 5.6-Sol Ultra on my corporate account. I haven't really used it yet. 2 months ago management was showing us scoreboards, praising leaders who used most tokens. Last few weeks, we're getting weekly emails, telling us that whenever we can - we should use cheaper models, and that we should watch the page which shows our tokens usage.

The leader boards based on token usage happened in our org for a month. Then we managed to convince the board that what matters is the reliable software shipped. Now we are back to DORA metrics.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#280

Post by alightsoul »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #148
bloppe wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"if I don't do it, someone worse will" Of course that's what Dario thinks because that's what every tech CEO thinks. Dario, Sam, Sundar, probably many Chinese CEOs as well. It's what everyone thinks. That's why they're competing so fiercely with one another. That's why they basically make all the same decisions. That's why we need properly open source AI.

Open source AI fails first contact with sufficiently-intelligent-as-to-be-dangerous AI. The day Mythos class models are open sourced will not be a good day. I don't think you understand the impact that will have on the world and on cyber defenders everywhere. It will be pure chaos. Even if you don't think Mythos-class is the bar, open source has to stop at some point, you don't hand everyone a superweapon.

Oh remember when the same was said about GPT-2? It will actually force cyber security to be taken seriously instead of just bureaucracy
Post reply on HN