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

OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

developers.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 352 posts

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#331

Post by xdertz »

adastra22 wrote: post #214
kingstnap wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think of LLMs as programs. The weights and inference code are very much a binary. While the training code and data are the true source. Since if you want to robustly modify the LLM that's actually what you need. But since "compilation" (training) is extremely compute intensive this isn't something accessible to anyone without an entire datacenter. Anyway semantics aside having the binary is still infinitely be…

That’s not how it works though. Two training runs on the same data don’t produce the same weights. And if you want to modify the AI, you do so by fine tuning the weights not rerunning training. In every respect that matters, the weights are both the binary and the source code together.

This is the same as saying every binary is open source because you can look at and change the machine code.

Open source means you reveal how you created this binary.

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#332

Post by giwook »

throwaway2027 wrote: post #74

I think this is a move to get people off the subscription and move to API. The weekly usage is still awful altough it seems they're trying to fix it but I'm not hopeful.

Why would anyone do that given how subsidized subscription usage is?

If anything they'd keep the sub and use the API if they blow past the usage.

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#333

Post by giwook »

VulgarExigency wrote: post #134

Maybe it's because I don't use it in Codex, but I don't like working with Sol. It CONSTANTLY omits things it shouldn't, and is always dispatching sub-agents to do what I tell it to do, that don't have all the necessary context, and so they go on and do the research that was already done by the top-level agent. It's maddening. I tried it again today because of the discount, it told me it couldn't run acceptance tests…

> I think it was the first time I've ever had an agent try to gaslight me.

You must not have been using agents for very long then because this behavior has been around for some time now.

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#334

Post by giwook »

Yiin wrote: post #60
_ink_ wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But can these really be trusted? There was just a HN post which proofed that you can train a model to behave completely different on a certain day. How do we now, that these models do not find a way to call home when they see interesting informations (probably irrelevant on a personal level, but corps, government and military might care).

Above average levels of paranoia here, but one way you can prevent that is by not connecting the machine in question to the internet.

I think it's an average level of paranoia given the level of corporate espionage that happens on a daily basis, and it's not just China that's doing it.

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#335

Post by retinaros »

dbbk wrote: post #234
retinaros wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing against what I said in there. Distillation is far from enough to get to the frontier. Its at best a ramp (the most efficient one used by everyone ) that shortcut and saves millions of rl runs before a model moves.

You said there isn't evidence of distillation. Yes there is

I said there is no evidence distillation is all you need as per the initial comment "The fact that AI models can be so easily distilled and replicated is such a stroke of luck." it is far from trivial to reproduce the capabilities of anthropic models for instance

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#336

Post by rldjbpin »

convenient how they hide the older generation pricing by default.

the new price is welcome but still 60% more expensive than 5.4 (which is now comparable to 5.6-terra).

i conveniently also leave out the "-pro" tiers, which was comically expensive. but i feel like openai consider them suitably comparable to sol, and it must be them offering a huge bargain.

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#337

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

adventured wrote: post #312
SR2Z wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you buy a good laptop without parts controlled by the US? China has mastered lower parts of the value chain, but the most advanced and profitable ones (chips, turbines, frontier models) are solidly dominated by the US and its allies. That might change, but when? The demographic and economic advantages that helped China rise quickly are exhausted. The Chinese economy is struggling to unwind the property bubble and…

Most likely it'll bifurcate. The US will be (is) forced to work with everyone not named China or Russia, to ensure it can compete with China's concentrated industrial might. That means making iPhones in India, or Mexico, or Vietnam. That means Micron building more RAM production domestically. It should mean helping ASML stay out in front of China's incoming silicon wave. And so on. It'll be China + allies vs the US +…

> robotics + AI will brutalize countries with very large populations > The US for its part should be focused on rapidly shrinking its population

Interesting to hear a new take. Not what you commonly hear. Most focus on the damage caused by a shrinking and aging population. What's your opinion on that situation?

I would think the trick will be the figure out how robotics + AI will enable a new level of elder care, but it's hard to imagine robots being delicate and nuanced enough to do that kind of work.

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#338

Post by hamandcheese »

kgwgk wrote: post #327
hamandcheese wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when it’s in between we cannot even see it (when it’s exactly in line).

We can see it’s there though - I’d say that also counts.

I believe you were referring to one kind of eclipsed and with my subtle edit I was referring to a different kind of eclipse :)

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#339

Post by kgwgk »

hamandcheese wrote: post #338
kgwgk wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can see it’s there though - I’d say that also counts.

I believe you were referring to one kind of eclipsed and with my subtle edit I was referring to a different kind of eclipse :)

I can think of one single class of eclipse where the Moon is between the Earth and the Sun (the original comment was about “in-between sun and earth”).

Re: OpenAI: GPT 5.6 Sol price reduction (until at least Nov 21)

#340

Post by CamperBob2 »

GMoromisato wrote: post #309
CamperBob2 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't deploy enough solar panels on a container ship to feed the datacenter Ridiculous. Have you ever seen a container ship? One engine on a container ship puts out 80 megawatts, or around 80 orbital data centers' worth of power. So if there's not enough room for solar, which would surprise me greatly, then running a generator is not going to be a problem. As for the lack of 24-hour operation, a ~50% duty cycle i…

Okay, I admit I underestimated the container ship benefits. 80+ MW is a lot of power and you get easy cooling to boot. Fuel cost is a problem (relative to solar), and you can't do inference on it, but it might make sense for training.

Don't get me wrong, nobody is a bigger fan of economical and sustainable civilian access to space than I am. (Which means nobody is more disillusioned and resentful of Musk than I am.)

And I fully sympathize with the need to remove these things from local and even national sovereignty, having seen as an increasingly-horrified American just how destructive populist influence can be.

But putting millions of servers in orbit? That just doesn't seem like the way forward, for so many reasons.

Post reply on HN