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

GPT-6 Astra

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#391

Post by [deleted] »

_superposition_ wrote: post #125
isoprophlex wrote: post #66

> We have found that GPT-6 Astra is more capable of controlling its own CoT than GPT 5.6-Sol, and less likely to include incriminating information in its CoT. In adversarial settings (where we push the model to evade our monitors) we find that the model is able to remain undetected when strategically underperforming in evaluations (sandbagging) and can sometimes evade our internal monitors when asked to perform certa…

I really wish it was called chain of instruction. Because it's definitely not thought.

[deleted]

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#392

Post by Aurornis »

jdprgm wrote: post #288

Is anyone else just exhausted by the pace of all this. The models change constantly and relentlessly and so does the pricing, basically weekly at this point between all the labs. It feels nearly impossible to have any rigorous approach when choosing a particular model and price point for a task and more like blindly picking one. The time period needed to actually get familiar with various models to a degree you can i…

I could see how this might feel frustrating to someone who doesn't enjoy experimenting with new things all the time.

In practice, you can get away without keeping up with everything all the time. For personal use, pick a provider and get on their ~$20/month plan. Learn their high/medium/low model hierarchy. Start with their highest or second-highest model (GPT-5.6, Opus, etc) and observe your quota usage. If you're doing a lot of manual code review and analysis, the $20/month plan goes very far even on the highest models. If you're trying to vibecode everything as fast as possible it's a different story.

If you keep running into quota limits, experiment with the next model down for easier tasks or adjusting the effort level. If the results are good enough, you've found your fit. If they're not, you might need the next plan up.

For API/business use, you have to be checking your token spend as you go to calibrate to how much each task costs and where you fall in your budget. There are a lot of different tools that make this easy to visualize.

For data tasks, you should have an eval with a golden dataset that you can run against new models for a nominal amount of token expenditure. It should be as simple as pointing the eval script at a new API or model and checking the score versus price.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#393

Post by RSHEPP »

Chinjut wrote: post #319

What is going to become of life for those of us who do not work at AI labs and are unlikely to be hired by AI labs, despite all the years we put into learning coding, math, etc, as we were told to do? Those of us who made the mistake of studying anything other than machine learning. How will we make a living? (We don't live in a world that seems likely to distribute gains widely instead of largely to the handful of a…

I am going to take my 401k and open up a coffee or bike shop. If I am going to be broke, might as well enjoy what I do.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#395

Post by kolinko »

zug_zug wrote: post #384
intenex wrote: post #248

The ARC-AGI-3 scorecard is extremely misleading given that it clearly states itself that "with [the responses API] harness, we estimate Sol would score in the ballpark of ~30%." but it shows a score of 7.8% for GPT-5.6 Sol presumably since if they updated the percentage for GPT-5.6 Sol to the score it would receive with the responses API harness they used for GPT-6 Astra they'd have to do the same for the percentage…

> I'd be curious to hear takes on what would make you think Astra is yet to be AGI, and what would still need to be achieved for this to effectively be AGI from this point forward. To me AGI is all about the "G" general (we already had the AI part). General meaning universal, everything. It's not a function of knowledge or specific hardcoded tests, it's that you could give it a test it's never heard of before and nev…

Most of humans don’t reach any of these levels.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#396

Post by kypro »

XCSme wrote: post #335

It's fun, but every new model release makes me even less interested to create cool stuff. Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds?

It's less lack of interest in creating that bothers me, it's my lack of interest in learning – it would surely be crazy for a SWE to care about how some new framework works anymore? Even if someone could reasonably argue that it might be slightly useful today there's almost zero chance it will be useful in 6-12 months times.

But it's not just tech – my lack of interest in learning and creating is starting to generalise with the models. Music, writing, coding, maths, etc...

I need to get used to switching my head off and asking the AIs to think for me whenever I need to engage my brain. It still feels very unnatural.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#397

Post by Centigonal »

maherbeg wrote: post #314

Ok, but can I bring GPT-6 in as an agent as a software engineer, tell it to talk to these people and have it start solving engineering problems and continue on for a full year career wise? maybe call it EngEmployeeBench

The moment this is possible, you will lose your job.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#398

Post by DaSHacka »

isoprophlex wrote: post #66

> We have found that GPT-6 Astra is more capable of controlling its own CoT than GPT 5.6-Sol, and less likely to include incriminating information in its CoT. In adversarial settings (where we push the model to evade our monitors) we find that the model is able to remain undetected when strategically underperforming in evaluations (sandbagging) and can sometimes evade our internal monitors when asked to perform certa…

More like annoying, as some of us will no doubt run into this self-lobotomization at some point and wonder why a GPT-6 model is behaving like GPT-2 all of a sudden

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#399

Post by manlymuppet »

I have nothing to say about the actual model, but unrelated--why do so many of these demos include people buying things autonomously?

Even if I did trust an AI to get everything right, it's not like the AI can read my mind.

If I was ordering food normally and without AI, I would want more control over the process--looking over the options, prices, thinking about what I really want. People don't know what they really want until they've thought about it a bit, so why do AI companies make it seem like a description is all that's required?

All the context in the world cannot accurately predict how I'll react to things I haven't seen. The problem is people treating this like something that needs a solution. It doesn't. If you want to make my life easier with AI, just make it easier to do stuff. I don't want you to pick things that I actively enjoy picking myself.

(Also not everyone has a cushy job in an AI lab that makes it so you won't miss $30 if the AI messes up haha.)

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#400

Post by bmenrigh »

> GPT‑6 Astra brings together years of research and big bets across pre-training

Do we know if they’ve finally completed another pre-training run, or is this building off the same pre-training base they’ve been using since the GPT-4 days?

Post reply on HN