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

OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 277 posts

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#251

Post by qarl2 »

zzleeper wrote: post #125
qarl2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know you're trying to be funny - but I'm offering a real fix for his problem. If you don't want a million agents arguing about things, you simply don't ask for that. One agent is sufficient to solve most issues.

I wonder if I would need a non-openai agent to enforce it.. I have tried so far with skills and agents.md and code stills end up over engineered to the moon. Will ask OpenAI to write me that agent! Hope the agent is not over engineered or else unsure how to solve the bootstrap puzzle :D

There's a misconception that a mistake one instance of a model makes will be repeated by other instances. In my experience most mistakes are just sampling noise, and having the same model (with empty context) check the work usually fixes it.

It's super easy - just ask your agent to set up a code review commit gate.

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#252

Post by qarl2 »

pixl97 wrote: post #197
qarl2 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> monstrosity that both Fable and another 5.6 Sol agent said is 98% useless and should be thrown away. This is why you should really have a sub agent review the code before allowing a commit. Your harness will do it all for you. Just ask.

Based on the propensity for models to love their own words, a different model to check might be a good idea.

Naw. The more verbose ones are more argumentative. They'll go at each other. It's a misconception that the same model will agree with itself.

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#253

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

jaggederest wrote: post #230
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not moving the goalposts - it's just having a different goal in the first place. This has been Shane Legg and Demis Hassabis' definition of AGI since DeepMind was founded, or before (way before OpenAI appeared), and also for me the goal of AI has always been human level (really a human brain, complete with emotions, etc, but we can start with basic learning/prediction).

I guess I fundamentally disagree, because on general knowledge they beat any human, and on processing speed they beat any human, and on problem solving likewise. I just don't see a domain besides "retain change over time" that they fail on, and that is something you can do in the system rather than the model - coding agents can and do build their own memory system and use it, like an amnestic human writing notes. I t…

I'm not sure there is anything to disagree on here - just different definitions of what we personally associate the term "AGI" with. There is no magic to the name, and however you choose to define it there will be less and more capable levels of AI that precede and follow it.

Separate from what you choose to call any given set of AI capabilities, learning is generally more than retaining change over time. Learning isn't the same as memorization - it's the difference between memorizing a stack of how-to books and going out and practicing the skill for yourself, and all that entails.

A learnt skill needs to be internalized such that in the future it's what is driving behavior, which means it needs to be in the weights. Imagine a robot trying to learn to play tennis where rather than updating it's connections between perception and action it's trying to store everything as a bunch of notes!

It's not just physical tasks where this applies - the same would be true to trying to teach a multimodal model to recognize different types of mushrooms from photos, or even learning a new language. If a system can truly learn for itself then it shouldn't need to be pre-trained with language, but rather should be able to learn by immersion and practice the same way we do, and the same way a dog learns to follow commands. You can't do this by leaving notes to yourself - the learning mechanism needs to be animal-like and update the systems weights in response to prediction failure - a runtime version of the way SGD-based pre-training updates weights in response to prediction errors.

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#254

Post by Razengan »

arctic-true wrote: post #50
syumei wrote: post #2

I guess the next model's name might be "galaxy"

I like this much better than chucking random numbers and letters at it like OAI was doing a year or so ago. I’d much rather have civilization destroyed by something called Astra or Fable than GPT-6.8s-latest.

I prefer "Smith", "Oracle", "Merovingian", "Architect"...

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#255

Post by 8cvor6j844qw_d6 »

jodacola wrote: post #8
gadtfly wrote: post #7

It seems like these articles might have come out prematurely, tbd by how much. I do not personally see any evidence of the new model having been released, or any official OpenAI post about it, or even any employee social media posts claiming it has now been released. All there is are Reuters, Axios, FT, etc, articles making a claim in the past tense. These articles were presumably pre-scheduled for 11am PT, and the m…

From the article: > GPT-6 Astra will first be available to a limited set of organizations in OpenAI's Daybreak Access program and will be available "in the coming days" for ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business and Enterprise customers and API developers. It’s only available to select orgs, first - Mythos style.

> We will give one banked reset for every day you don't have access to Astra on your paid ChatGPT plan, starting today.

At least OpenAI seems to be able to handle the PR side better than Anthropic.

[1]: https://x.com/thsottiaux/status/2095651088502591861

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#257

Post by michaellee8 »

pixl97 wrote: post #210
oh_no wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's all openai models but i'm very happy openai continues to focus on efficiency rather than reasoningtokenmaxxing

My assumption is in the long term that efficiency will break interpretability, which will lead to questionable alignment. As efficiency drives capitalism and evolution we'll run headlong at it and try to deal with the risk as a side effect.

either way we cannot see those thoughts anyway

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#258

Post by wahnfrieden »

lacoolj wrote: post #76
wahnfrieden wrote: post #46

2.5x more expensive than Sol. Can expect 2.5x more usage in Codex subscription. Sol is already brutal (even after their recent fixes, it's just a token-hungry model: I go through a full 20x account per day, on Sol Med/High standard speed, with ~2 threads). Note that Tibo recommended using Sol Med as daily driver. When I'm doing less complicated work, I can't even make it past 2-3 days with Sol Med, whereas I was able…

Jesus what are you doing that requires Sol usage so often? Terra not enough? I know Luna isn't reliable, so that's fair. Genuinely curious though, because I use Cursor daily and almost everything I do, highly complex or high volume, can be handled with Auto mode or Composer 2.5 (or Grok 4.6 High). So I have to assume you're doing something far more complex than what I am

Terra is not enough for many tasks - even Sol is not enough. That's why I'm eager for Astra.

I'm doing a lot of rearchitecting/refactoring and hardening in a large handwritten codebase; iterative performance and storage optimization (some areas I've been iterating on since January, with tremendous new progress unlocked by each new model release); offline-friendly, multi-device realtime sync with complicated requirements; and various natural language processing and other such problems that are essentially unsolvable but can become more accurate and better tested for accuracy through iterative work. Off the top of my head.

Some of these tasks involve a lot of code reading or other inputs, or reevaluating work. Token efficiency is no help there, if the input can't simply be skipped. Cheaper models are sometimes bad at summarizing or highlighting the right parts, depending on the task.

I also don't use subagents except for Luna. I'm mindful of cached sessions and start new ones often to avoid loading in full contexts (often with some kind of handoff doc or skill).

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#259

Post by jaggederest »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #253
jaggederest wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I fundamentally disagree, because on general knowledge they beat any human, and on processing speed they beat any human, and on problem solving likewise. I just don't see a domain besides "retain change over time" that they fail on, and that is something you can do in the system rather than the model - coding agents can and do build their own memory system and use it, like an amnestic human writing notes. I t…

I'm not sure there is anything to disagree on here - just different definitions of what we personally associate the term "AGI" with. There is no magic to the name, and however you choose to define it there will be less and more capable levels of AI that precede and follow it. Separate from what you choose to call any given set of AI capabilities, learning is generally more than retaining change over time. Learning is…

> If a system can truly learn for itself then it shouldn't need to be pre-trained with language, but rather should be able to learn by immersion and practice the same way we do, and the same way a dog learns to follow commands. You can't do this by leaving notes to yourself - the learning mechanism needs to be animal-like and update the systems weights in response to prediction failure - a runtime version of the way SGD-based pre-training updates weights in response to prediction errors

I am not sure why any of that is necessarily true. I think you are crediting the human brain with a lot more than it actually does - memory is something in the direction of a fine tune on existing neural hardware, it's really not anything special, and I absolutely think that "just taking notes", when taken to a sufficient fidelity, is enough to pass that bar.

Re: OpenAI begins rolling out GPT-6 Astra

#260

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

jaggederest wrote: post #259
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure there is anything to disagree on here - just different definitions of what we personally associate the term "AGI" with. There is no magic to the name, and however you choose to define it there will be less and more capable levels of AI that precede and follow it. Separate from what you choose to call any given set of AI capabilities, learning is generally more than retaining change over time. Learning is…

> If a system can truly learn for itself then it shouldn't need to be pre-trained with language, but rather should be able to learn by immersion and practice the same way we do, and the same way a dog learns to follow commands. You can't do this by leaving notes to yourself - the learning mechanism needs to be animal-like and update the systems weights in response to prediction failure - a runtime version of the way…

You can't take notes before you've learned language, so if that's how you propose to learn then you are doomed to build something with less learning capability than an human brain.

Maybe you don't care - if you just want to push to see how far an LLM can go that's fine. but it's not going to be superhuman-level, or even human-level, if it doesn't have the learning ability of a human. If it relies on language and notes to itself then it is just an LLM.

Post reply on HN