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

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#491

Post by gruntled-worker »

zachthewf wrote: post #411
dalemhurley wrote: post #284

OpenAI is killing it now that they are more focused. Killing projects like Sora et al have seen it go from irrelevant to level footing with Anthropic. Sol is so much better than Fable 5. Then we get Astra (yet to use it) few days after Fable 5.1 (which is very impressive). Codex is slightly better than Claude Code. Good on Sam Altman getting back to basics and turning OpenAI around.

I’ve found Sol performance to be incredibly spiky. It has tremendous IQ and can fix very difficult bugs. But it is horrible at design (both visual and system design), anything that involves thinking about users or UX, and massively overcomplicates almost all work.

> massively overcomplicates almost all work

People with high IQ often do this IRL. There's training tension in this area. Intelligence and overcomplication correlate and are hard to extricate.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#492

Post by jpatten »

ChrisGammell wrote: post #246

All the people here are focused on security and costs while I'm like "hey kicad on the announcement page!" Every clanker is an autorouter these days, eh.

Yeah I was really excited to see the KiCAD example. Curious how useful it is in practice.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#493

Post by chimprich »

eggnet wrote: post #471
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…

AI was supposed to mean artificial intelligence. It was hijacked, and AGI was coined to be the name of actual AI. Since we are apparently redefining AGI, what will the real artificial intelligence be called?

AI does mean Artificial Intelligence. That's what the initials stand for. The field has been called that since the 50s.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#494

Post by azan_ »

pera wrote: post #387
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…

To each their own. Personally I will start feeling the AGI as soon as we move from chatting about benchmark results to learn that some lab just announced the discovery of tens of novel treatments for rare diseases. Maybe I'm too boring but it seems quite pointless to have this same prediction game every time a new model is released.

I think treatment is not good benchmark - it requires lots of waiting and lots of regulatory work. The better benchmark - in my opinion- would be math discovery.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#495

Post by xtracto »

billypilgrim wrote: post #406
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?

„The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I'll never be as good as a wall.“ -Mitch Hedberg

Thank you. That is an amazing quote on a lot of levels.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#496

Post by arjie »

upupupandaway wrote: post #334
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…

> The models change constantly and relentlessly and so does the pricing, basically weekly at this point between all the labs. A dev in my team saw a new model and changed one application to use said model (essentially changing the contents of a url). One week later I received an escalation from the CTO of the company that our pace of weekly usage was in the millions of dollars (rather than low hundred thousands). Tur…

Okay, well, that seems like a natural problem. I could understand if he went from one of the Gemini Flashes to the next (when they rebranded Flash to Flash Lite and came up with a new much more expensive Flash). Now that would be a mess.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#497

Post by bgarbiak »

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?

Yeah. I’m almost glad I didn’t invest any time in any of my 100s ideas for a startup. Most of them would be destroyed by AI by now.

But, you can create cool stuff just for yourself. That’s the upside. It’s just hard to make a living on cool stuff for yourself.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#498

Post by davidguetta »

kroaton wrote: post #296
dalemhurley wrote: post #284

OpenAI is killing it now that they are more focused. Killing projects like Sora et al have seen it go from irrelevant to level footing with Anthropic. Sol is so much better than Fable 5. Then we get Astra (yet to use it) few days after Fable 5.1 (which is very impressive). Codex is slightly better than Claude Code. Good on Sam Altman getting back to basics and turning OpenAI around.

I think it mostly shows that there is no moat and the only advantage the U.S companies have over the Chinese is more compute. Qwen Max, Kimi K3, GLM 5.3 are really close to Opus/Sol/Fable/Astra and they are open weights.

bringing the price down b.c. competition != no moat.

There's not 100 frontier labs, it's not like airline companies

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#499

Post by fastball »

dalemhurley wrote: post #284

OpenAI is killing it now that they are more focused. Killing projects like Sora et al have seen it go from irrelevant to level footing with Anthropic. Sol is so much better than Fable 5. Then we get Astra (yet to use it) few days after Fable 5.1 (which is very impressive). Codex is slightly better than Claude Code. Good on Sam Altman getting back to basics and turning OpenAI around.

Codex's lack of auto-mode is what prevents me from using it for serious work compared to Claude Code.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#500

Post by andxor »

CSMastermind wrote: post #351
HAL3000 wrote: post #137

Finally, OpenAI has a Fable/Mythos class model. 5.6 Sol felt like 5.5 on steroids, probably just a different checkpoint with a lot more RL post training. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some conceptual similarities to the kind of latent reasoning Anthropic sees in claude's J-space, although those aren't the same thing. Recurrent/looped transformers themselves aren't a new concept, but it's interesting to finally…

Sol easily outperforms Fable on every task I've tried it on.

That's not my experience and I suspect it's not most people's experience. Out of curiosity, what's the hardest task you tried?
Post reply on HN