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

GPT-5.6

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.6

#911

Post by bearjaws »

camillomiller wrote: post #899
wkjagt wrote: post #893

I just watched the video on their launch page and I am really not sure how I feel about it. On one side, it's cool that these people get to start businesses and stuff using ChatGPT (assuming these are true stories), but how much of the business is really them? And how much does this business rely on a chat bot always being present as a kind of know it all employee? Maybe I'm just being naive or old fashioned (haven't…

I would add to this that, to me and to many friends in their 30-40s, using AI models to achieve something we used our brains to achieve feels... empty? wrong? soulless? Sure, a lot of menial work can be relegated to the models, and it's ok, most of the time, but you finish a day of work with the inability to shake a precise new feeling: that you haven't really achieved something, even if you shipped more than on an a…

I think this is where people start to consider you a "Luddite".

Is it bad that you used a computer and Google and lifted information from other people to accomplish a task?

My father is a machinist and has built has knowledge off the skills and documentation of thousands before him, is that empty?

You still have to do the actual work, and where do you draw the line on "shipping more". If a farmer now has an automated tractor, does that mean his work is now trivial?

Re: GPT-5.6

#912

Post by kouteiheika »

jatora wrote: post #889
w4yai wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. I'm done with US companies. Let's go China !

have fun with your sub-tier models then. More compute for me

...until you get rug-pulled (like with Fable recently) because the model you're depending on is proprietary, then you have fun with no model at all.

The sooner Chinese labs catch up the better it is for all of us, even if you don't use their models, as they're the ones who define the baseline capability that cannot be taken away from you (no one is going to limit/remove access to an LLM if you can get equivalent/better unrestricted access from Chinese open-weight models).

Re: GPT-5.6

#913

Post by fomoz »

5.6 Sol High Fast is using more capacity than 5.5 High Fast, I hit the 5h limit for the first time.

Other than that, I think the difference between 5.5 and 5.6 will be the same as 5.4 and 5.5. 5.5 is just less frustrating to use, although not perfect and still has derp moments. But a lot less than 5.4.

So I expect 5.6 Sol to be smoother to use. But so far it just feels slower. We'll see.

Re: GPT-5.6

#914

Post by simianwords »

698969 wrote: post #855
simianwords wrote: post #517

GPT Terra is 50% cheaper than 5.5 while being more performant. So it’s like a straight up 50% reduction in cost! That leads me to a question. Why wouldn’t they just default to terra in ChatGPT in the last few months? If they didn’t then they burnt money for no reason by giving a shittier model at a higher price

50% reduction in cost charged to customers, inference cost may as well be the same, we don't know.

Recent reports that OpenAI found optimisations would explain that these are legit

Re: GPT-5.6

#915

Post by gordonhart »

First impression of 5.6 Sol in Codex is fantastic — the model asks dozens of clarifying questions before starting to implement where other models (including 5.5 and Terra) just yolo it with assumptions that needed to be walked back later.

Re: GPT-5.6

#917

Post by spicyusername »

camillomiller wrote: post #899
wkjagt wrote: post #893

I just watched the video on their launch page and I am really not sure how I feel about it. On one side, it's cool that these people get to start businesses and stuff using ChatGPT (assuming these are true stories), but how much of the business is really them? And how much does this business rely on a chat bot always being present as a kind of know it all employee? Maybe I'm just being naive or old fashioned (haven't…

I would add to this that, to me and to many friends in their 30-40s, using AI models to achieve something we used our brains to achieve feels... empty? wrong? soulless? Sure, a lot of menial work can be relegated to the models, and it's ok, most of the time, but you finish a day of work with the inability to shake a precise new feeling: that you haven't really achieved something, even if you shipped more than on an a…

I can relate, but it's our turn of the wheel it seems.

It's a phenomenon that's happened basically nonstop since the Enlightenment. Yeaterday it was John Henry, today it's you.

Time to find a new hobby to bring intellectual satisfaction if typing "do my job" over and over in a text box isn't doing it.

Re: GPT-5.6

#918

Post by gyosko »

camillomiller wrote: post #899
wkjagt wrote: post #893

I just watched the video on their launch page and I am really not sure how I feel about it. On one side, it's cool that these people get to start businesses and stuff using ChatGPT (assuming these are true stories), but how much of the business is really them? And how much does this business rely on a chat bot always being present as a kind of know it all employee? Maybe I'm just being naive or old fashioned (haven't…

I would add to this that, to me and to many friends in their 30-40s, using AI models to achieve something we used our brains to achieve feels... empty? wrong? soulless? Sure, a lot of menial work can be relegated to the models, and it's ok, most of the time, but you finish a day of work with the inability to shake a precise new feeling: that you haven't really achieved something, even if you shipped more than on an a…

I feel like this: "working" with AI is fucking depressing.

Re: GPT-5.6

#919

Post by mingqiz »

cevn wrote: post #233
hk__2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d argue the opposite. I’ve switched back and forth from one to the other and Opus/Fable has been constantly better than any GPT in my daily work. It’s a bit slower but it does the things right, with as little code as possible, some comments where needed. Codex is faster but you always have to correct it because it got something wrong; it writes tons of code ("let me add a small helper") with obvious comments.

Sounds like you are talking past each other. GP is saying the harness of codex is higher quality, which I can believe, even if the models are not as good as Opus/Fable.

It's the other way actually. Cc is a better harness but gpt models are just so much better in my personal experience (at least for backend) ever since 5.4.

Re: GPT-5.6

#920

Post by thearrow »

camillomiller wrote: post #899
wkjagt wrote: post #893

I just watched the video on their launch page and I am really not sure how I feel about it. On one side, it's cool that these people get to start businesses and stuff using ChatGPT (assuming these are true stories), but how much of the business is really them? And how much does this business rely on a chat bot always being present as a kind of know it all employee? Maybe I'm just being naive or old fashioned (haven't…

I would add to this that, to me and to many friends in their 30-40s, using AI models to achieve something we used our brains to achieve feels... empty? wrong? soulless? Sure, a lot of menial work can be relegated to the models, and it's ok, most of the time, but you finish a day of work with the inability to shake a precise new feeling: that you haven't really achieved something, even if you shipped more than on an a…

I also feel this, and it also troubles me. Unfortunately, we may be in the minority on this site.

What the other replies seem to overlook is that it fundamentally changes the nature of the work - it’s not the next step in the evolution after an IDE, it is closer to an automated tractor, and yes that does make the farmer’s work trivial. Pressing a button and having the field get plowed is a very different experience than manually plowing a field yourself. I can no longer in good conscience say “I plowed that field”, because all I did was press a button. The tractor plowed that field.

Most people on this site seem to feel comfortable claiming “I plowed that field” after they pressed the button that started the automated tractor. Okay, you had the idea to press the button - but you didn’t actually do the work, you delegated it. Same end result, but a different lived experience. Now would I rather actually plow a field by hand or simply press a button? You can probably guess - but the two actions do differ greatly in the experience they bring me, and the feelings of satisfaction.

Post reply on HN