Live data from Hacker News

GPT-6 Astra

openai.com

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#601

I'm sure it's going to do great on all sorts of benchmarks, but the video--the actual marketing video that if anything is incentivised to overstate things--is full of careful cuts just before it would do anything that still wouldn't actually be that impressive. It's AGI, and it's going to upload photos, or change a background slide colour. Even the people hyping it up, who believe that it's really artificial intellig…

I also noticed that, and it did bug me.

The benchmarks are impressive though.

One other thing that bugged me though was that they crop every single plot in some cases the y-axis would show a range between like 40 and 70%. Makes the whole thing feel like a spectacle rather than anything serious. I find it cheapens it because it is quite serious in the end.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#602

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…

Your examples are things that most humans cannot do, or things that AI can already do. For example most humans, even most intelligent humans, could not write a well-received book, run a successful company, or make a popular game. On the other hand, AI can absolutely sort through research, draw conclusions on complex topics, and argue them persuasively. Likewise, I don't know what you mean by a "decent" conversation, but millions of people converse with chatbots daily, so I don't know why you say AI fails to meet that bar.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#603
post #235

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…

Given the Hugging Face incident, you could imagine them trying their best to have their cake and eat it: 1) don't create too much attention in the media or risk increasing the chances of regulation, 2) win dominance over Fable to continue to increase their market share from Anthropic.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#606
post #347

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?

Maybe instead of creating cool stuff try to go and solve real problems? It seems to me that we are lacking in that department since all that LLM fuss has started 3 or so years ago.

What is a "real problem" to you?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#607

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…

Using a harness designed for a specific problem set to solve that specific problem set, means the AI+harness is generally intelligent? How do you figure that?

Or do you mean that, for any given problem, we could theoretically design a harness that allows AI to solve it (not that, one single harness solves everything). In which case I'm still not convinced but I guess could see why one would believe that.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#608
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.

I would trust 4chan more than I trust Twitter aura farming.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#609
post #347

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?

Can it? Last I checked, all my free software operating systems and browsers were still hacked together trash. I can't wait for AI to actually be good so I can spam a bunch of AGPL code with it.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#610
post #514

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.

> Sol is so much better than Fable 5 I'm genuinely so confused when people say this with a straight face. Are you talking about coding? Desktop use? Prose? Or something else? Sol is a much smaller models and it shows. It often misses the forest for the trees.

>> I'm genuinely so confused when people say this with a straight face. Are you talking about coding? Desktop use? Prose? Or something else?

Same. It makes me wonder what types of things the person must be working on.

Post reply on HN