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

GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 219 posts

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#41

Post by [deleted] »

jychang wrote: post #30
aarvin_roshin wrote: post #4

Thoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: > It's a damn good model. Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. Fixed all the problems I had with GPT-5.5. > It is incredibly determined. Will run for a day without even using a /goal. It understands subagents incredibly well and is great at orchestrating. It's super pleasant in use cases like OpenClaw and Hermes Agent. It knows iOS dev incredibly w…

> Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. THIS IS BECAUSE GPT-5.6 SOL IS... just a more posttrained version of GPT-5.5, not a brand new bigger model than GPT-5.5. It's not like how Mythos is bigger than Opus. OpenAI switching to Sol/Terra/Luna renaming is just a way to rip off people and charge more usage for the same sized model. GPT-5.6 --------> GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-5.6-mini ---> GPT-5.6 Terra GPT-…

[deleted]

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#43

Post by threatripper »

jychang wrote: post #30
aarvin_roshin wrote: post #4

Thoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: > It's a damn good model. Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. Fixed all the problems I had with GPT-5.5. > It is incredibly determined. Will run for a day without even using a /goal. It understands subagents incredibly well and is great at orchestrating. It's super pleasant in use cases like OpenClaw and Hermes Agent. It knows iOS dev incredibly w…

> Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. THIS IS BECAUSE GPT-5.6 SOL IS... just a more posttrained version of GPT-5.5, not a brand new bigger model than GPT-5.5. It's not like how Mythos is bigger than Opus. OpenAI switching to Sol/Terra/Luna renaming is just a way to rip off people and charge more usage for the same sized model. GPT-5.6 --------> GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-5.6-mini ---> GPT-5.6 Terra GPT-…

My feeling is that GPT-5.5 doesn't lack the raw intelligence so much as it lacks "methodology". I don't know how exactly to put it... how to approach a problem, how to take care of the details and side effects, how to handle unexpected difficulties and bugs, how to not spin out of control, how to write solid code, how to clean up afterwards, how to document, how to give useful feedback... the things that you learn on the job.

So, if they improved a lot in those areas, then GPT-5.6 could become a lot more useful compared to GPT-5.5 even though it might score lower in many benchmarks. It's possible but unlikely since their approach was mostly brute force in the past.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#44

Post by bredren »

avereveard wrote: post #31
reassess_blind wrote: post #6

I’m bouncing back between Codex and Claude like a ping-pong ball. I much prefer the experience using Codex, less verbose and to-the-point I’ve found. But Fable, being as strong as it is, is a big draw for Claude right now. I’ll likely switch back to Codex if 5.6 Sol is comparable.

Same. For some reason late opus model are very superficial doing ux work and so am using gpt for that, but backend is much better engineered by claude, gpt prefer to duplicate everything it needs on the spot causing class sprawl

How are y'all carrying context history from one agent to the other?

I also flip between the models due to quota, TUI enhancements, model updates and service availability.

To handle this, I built a thing that normalizes your transcripts between Claude Code and Codex into a shared DB, then a CLI and skill.

It has made it so it doesn't matter what I built where (or when) I just refer to the work and drop in a /total-recall (or $total-recall on codex) and the agent brings it into the current convo.

I realize there are a lot of ~memory tools out there, but I think particular my approach and product behavior is unique.

If you're open to giving it a try, I'd appreciate any feedback: https://contextify.sh recent show hn: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48777790

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#45

Post by patates »

bashtoni wrote: post #17
aarvin_roshin wrote: post #4

Thoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: > It's a damn good model. Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. Fixed all the problems I had with GPT-5.5. > It is incredibly determined. Will run for a day without even using a /goal. It understands subagents incredibly well and is great at orchestrating. It's super pleasant in use cases like OpenClaw and Hermes Agent. It knows iOS dev incredibly w…

I feel like listening to Theo about anything technical is like consulting a Labrador retriever for advice on quantum physics. Every time I've ever seen one of his videos it's pretty clear he has very little understanding of development or engineering. I first became aware of him from his early "unit tests are a waste of time" stuff, and it seems his skillset is building a personal brand. Fair play, he's clearly talen…

> it's pretty clear he has very little understanding of development or engineering

I cannot prove it but I have a feeling that you may be conflating "he clearly has different opinions on things I consider non-negotiable" to "he doesn't know what he's talking about".

I also watched a lot of his videos. I wildly disagree with him a lot of times, but he has his reasoning, and I can see (and verify!) that those ideas are coming from an engineering perspective.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#46

Post by tyteen4a03 »

reassess_blind wrote: post #6

I’m bouncing back between Codex and Claude like a ping-pong ball. I much prefer the experience using Codex, less verbose and to-the-point I’ve found. But Fable, being as strong as it is, is a big draw for Claude right now. I’ll likely switch back to Codex if 5.6 Sol is comparable.

Why not both? T3 Code exists.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#47

Post by Havoc »

bashtoni wrote: post #17
aarvin_roshin wrote: post #4

Thoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: > It's a damn good model. Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. Fixed all the problems I had with GPT-5.5. > It is incredibly determined. Will run for a day without even using a /goal. It understands subagents incredibly well and is great at orchestrating. It's super pleasant in use cases like OpenClaw and Hermes Agent. It knows iOS dev incredibly w…

I feel like listening to Theo about anything technical is like consulting a Labrador retriever for advice on quantum physics. Every time I've ever seen one of his videos it's pretty clear he has very little understanding of development or engineering. I first became aware of him from his early "unit tests are a waste of time" stuff, and it seems his skillset is building a personal brand. Fair play, he's clearly talen…

And half his videos are him coming up with indirect ways of saying look how amazing I am.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#48

Post by zuzululu »

aarvin_roshin wrote: post #4

Thoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: > It's a damn good model. Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. Fixed all the problems I had with GPT-5.5. > It is incredibly determined. Will run for a day without even using a /goal. It understands subagents incredibly well and is great at orchestrating. It's super pleasant in use cases like OpenClaw and Hermes Agent. It knows iOS dev incredibly w…

here is the original x post

https://x.com/theo/status/2074708892341481755

5.6 sol seems to hit a lot of the gaps with 5.5

sucks its not "mythos" but i will take it

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#49

Post by bashtoni »

ttoinou wrote: post #39
bashtoni wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like listening to Theo about anything technical is like consulting a Labrador retriever for advice on quantum physics. Every time I've ever seen one of his videos it's pretty clear he has very little understanding of development or engineering. I first became aware of him from his early "unit tests are a waste of time" stuff, and it seems his skillset is building a personal brand. Fair play, he's clearly talen…

There is a whole religion about tests that is worth attacking though

Sure. If his take was "100% unit test coverage is a waste of time" I think that's not unreasonable. You could make a case that the "you must write tests before you write code, every single time!" stuff is needlessly dogmatic. I also think that sometimes people focus too much on unit tests to the detriment of end to end tests that better model actual system interactions.

None of these were Theo's take. He was pushing the idea that unit tests in general were a waste of time because you could be shipping new features instead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvBHyip4peo for an example of this. The nicest possible interpretation on this is that he's deliberately saying something he knows is wrong to attract attention.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

#50

Post by tedsanders »

prodigycorp wrote: post #32
CjHuber wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to hear people like gpt-5.5. For me it feels smart only at one shot prompts, but if you try to build up session context before doing something it feels magnitudes inferior to Claude. I'm almost sure its because the thinking of previous turns is stripped with the responses API, so if I tell it to analyse something deeply, what remains of the understanding in future turns is only the short response text of…

Do you have a source for this? I'm pretty sure responses api is only there to obfuscate reasoning, but that they're still keeping reasoning traces in the backend.

I work at OpenAI and can confirm that's correct: reasoning tokens are discarded after each new user turn (though not after each message or tool call).

Our docs show a diagram here:

https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/reasoning

> Input and output tokens from each step are carried over, while reasoning tokens are discarded.

Keeping reasoning tokens around is better for caching and for remembering past insights, so you might reasonably wonder why we designed it this way. The main benefit of dropping reasoning tokens is that you can fit a lot more work inside the model's context window before you're forced into a slow and lossy compaction step. This was a larger consideration with our earlier reasoning models that had shorter context windows (~200k), longer thinking times (up to ~100k per message), and poor compaction. However, now that we've shipped longer context windows, we've trained our models think much more efficiently, and we've made compaction way better than it used to be, the balance of factors is changing. Tune in Thursday!

Post reply on HN