GPT-6 Astra • Hacker News Board

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#531

Post by XCSme » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:50 PM UTC

soundworlds wrote: post #468

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?

Don't worry, like with every revolutionary technology before this, it takes 5-10 years for people to find new and creative ways to use it. It will be considered its own medium in many spaces (e.g. film is now different to theatre)

But was there ever a technology that even the people working on it said it's making them feel depressed and scared?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#532

Post by echoangle » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:50 PM UTC

manlymuppet wrote: post #399

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…

That’s exactly the problem I have with all this agent ideas too. Imagine you had a human concierge that is just waiting for your instructions and is as smart or a bit smarter than you. Would you just tell them “plan this holiday for me” or “order this food”? I don’t even trust my friends to get this right, why would I give this to someone else?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#533

Post by dakolli » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:51 PM UTC

karmasimida wrote: post #124

x312 wrote: post #98

Hmm, 61 on ArtificialAnalysis, effectively matching GPT-5.6 and trailing the new Meta model. How is that possible along with the other metrics they shared? Insanely jagged intelligence?

Idk, this means the benchmark has bigger problems ... no way Astra will be worse than Opus 5 Only thing I would trust is the what X/Twitter crowds are saying about a model after 2-3 weeks of its launch. But before that I would already tried the model and have my own conclusion.

must be something wrong with the benchmark, the thing everyone optimizes for. That's actually a big red flag, and very cringe that you'd naively believe OpenAI.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#534

Post by XCSme » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:51 PM UTC

Flere-Imsaho wrote: post #471

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?

> Like, what's the point, if the next AI can do it in 5 seconds? I built a phone app recently, not released to the public, just an idea I had for ages but could never spend the time actually building. Its 100% vibe coded, and took me a few weekends to build... I'm talking a few hours in total. The point I'm making is that you now have the power to create stuff you would never have had the time to build. You can think…

Yes, that's cool and useful. Creating stuff for ourselves, for our own use. But we are social animals, we like sharing.

Before it was cool to share an app you made, but now? What's the point of sharing an app, if the other person can make their own, even better suited for their needs, in a few seconds?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#535

Post by ChaseRensberger » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:54 PM UTC

when do i get to go to the moon

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#536

Post by vatsachak » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:55 PM UTC

dingdong2026 wrote: post #473

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…

Only someone who doesn't do any work of any meaningful difficulty could think these models have anything to do with AGI. Today I spent half a day trying to solve a moderately interesting software engineering problem. I was switching between GPT-5.6 Sol and Fable 5.1 to check each other's work in Cursor. And the result was gradually driving me insane. As the models struggled to find a solution that would actually work…

What was the problem?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#537

Post by sensanaty » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:57 PM UTC

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…

AGI is a meaningless term that can mean nothing and everything at the same time. It can be used by AI bros to hype their latest releases which are always one step away from achieving AGI, or it can be used by anti-AI people to say it's not AGI because of X arbitrary thing they decided on in the moment. It's a term of pure convenience meant to obfuscate other more pressing discussions on the topic.

Most telling is M$ or whichever one of these borg megacorpos defined AGI as (paraphrased) "AGI is whatever tooling earns us a gazillion dollars in revenue"

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#538

Post by XCSme » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 10:57 PM UTC

nater5000 wrote: post #512

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 point is to inject something into the process that these AIs can't do for you. People SHOULD feel like making a useless Mario Kart clone isn't worth the effort anymore. They should, instead, be trying to figure out how to actually use these models to make something that doesn't feel like a useless Mario Kart clone.

One thing that still stands today, is that even vibe-coding a good product takes time and thousands of dollars in tokens costs.

Software will be more like a "proof of work", where people would still pay $100 for good software that took $10k tokens to build.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#539

Post by adastra22 » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 11:01 PM UTC

abixb wrote: post #227

I want to take a step back: So, this is GPT-6 -- the natural number version release comparable to GPT-4 and GPT-5 from the past few years. The ARC-AGI-3 score is obviously impressive at 99.9% (we'll need to wait for more details on how they used the response API harness on GPT-6 Astra, wrt reasoning retention and compaction), but every other benchmarks seems to be a relatively modest improvement, comparable with any…

We've had AGI (artificial general intelligence) probably since the first release of ChatGPT, and certainly since the first agentic harnesses. They're just finally acknowledging what the term means.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#540

Post by ex-aws-dude » Thu, Sep 03, 2026, 11:01 PM UTC

astrobiased wrote: post #369

I can’t help but notice how much this echoes Francois Chollet’s On the Measure of Intelligence: https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547 Most of frontier-model progress still looks like skill acquisition optimization: broader benchmark coverage and performance, more domains absorbed into the training distribution, and increasingly strong performance within that surface area. It seems more about coverage-driven competence. So…

They can do new tasks with in-context learning but its obviously limited by context window