Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unironically, I think in the future we will have the option to run filters in our browsers that can reword articles to your preferred writing style. Like user stylesheets for text. I also assume it already exists out there, I've just been to lazy so far to look for it. It's a relatively obvious application of LLMs.
I've used that for about 15 years because I live abroad, it's called Google translate.
Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
121–130 of 144 posts
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#122As of today, Ploy’s agent runs on GPT-5.6 Sol, the flagship tier of the model family OpenAI released this morning. Wait a moment, did they make the switch based on half a days of playing with Sol? Are these companies ran by teenagers?
hah - we actually skew staff, senior staff. We have been testing GPT 5.6 for about a week as a preview model through a YC relationship, providing them feedback on the model. Our evals run in github CI and we can run them all in about 15 minutes against our eval bench of 115+ web design and marketing related jobs that ploy.ai specializes in. then after we toggled it on (through a posthog feature flag) we actively moni…
The funny thing is - when I first saw ploy, I didn't take it very seriously since so many of the signals that used to signify quality (decent design, copy, hard technical problems) are easy to fake. Plus the "grow while you sleep" space is crowded with weak players.
I wonder what the new markers of quality will be, which would separate the hand-crafted (to the extent possible) work v/s slop.
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#123> Numbers like that buy a model a real migration effort. Such a silly choice of words. I wish the human directing the LLM writing the article put some effort into rewriting the worst examples of LLM style. > But it did extremely well, and the promise was immediate and specific: builds finishing in less than half the wall-clock time, at 27% lower cost, scoring at or above our incumbent on completed work. The way the L…
> The way the LLMs write (Claude perhaps?) With short phrases separated by colons, commas, or full stops, is so poor and frustrating. This is exactly why I keep a WRITING.md file alongside AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md. Most people spend time telling the model what to build, but very little time telling it how to write. LLMs are surprisingly good at following explicit style guidance if you bother to give it to them. Mine in…
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
hah - we actually skew staff, senior staff. We have been testing GPT 5.6 for about a week as a preview model through a YC relationship, providing them feedback on the model. Our evals run in github CI and we can run them all in about 15 minutes against our eval bench of 115+ web design and marketing related jobs that ploy.ai specializes in. then after we toggled it on (through a posthog feature flag) we actively moni…
This is super impressive - both the pedigree of the team and the approach you took. The funny thing is - when I first saw ploy, I didn't take it very seriously since so many of the signals that used to signify quality (decent design, copy, hard technical problems) are easy to fake. Plus the "grow while you sleep" space is crowded with weak players. I wonder what the new markers of quality will be, which would separat…
Funnily enough, we spent a long time on our brand. From our launch video that has human actors, to our product details. I believe a distinctive, high quality, well implemented brand is still a hallmark of a strong product or service.
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#125Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#126Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, what did that have to do with the article?
They also migrated and that also made the workflow cheaper. It has everything to do with the article.
Neither are mentioned in the article at all, which was about a migration from Claude Opus to GPT 5.6.
Maybe a bit of DeepSeek astroturfing going on?
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#128We at Playcode.io - a company similar to Ploy are still using Opus 4.6. "Why?" you might ask. Because GPT 5.6 Sol, while fast and pleasant to use, is essentially the same model as 5.5 wrapped in new marketing packaging, just to avoid losing ground to Anthropic. In practice, it's the same quality: it generates the same garbage, tons of code, and can never solve even a single complex task. We simply don't trust it to w…
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#129We at Playcode.io - a company similar to Ploy are still using Opus 4.6. "Why?" you might ask. Because GPT 5.6 Sol, while fast and pleasant to use, is essentially the same model as 5.5 wrapped in new marketing packaging, just to avoid losing ground to Anthropic. In practice, it's the same quality: it generates the same garbage, tons of code, and can never solve even a single complex task. We simply don't trust it to w…
Did you just paste your marketing copy into a hn comment?
Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone probably has the same question: what about Fable? Fable 5 is sick. It is simply the best model in the world out of everything we have ever tried. It's absolutely fantastic. It solves almost any task from start to finish, the way it should be done — no errors, perfect code. It's a miracle. If there's any way to make it a little more affordable, that would be incredible. As for GPT-5.6 Sol — it doesn't even co…
> Fable 5 is sick. [It] solves almost any task from start to finish, the way it should be done — no errors, perfect code. It's a miracle. > As for GPT-5.6 Sol — it doesn't even come close. I honestly don't understand why people even try to compare them. What kind of problems are you working on? I like Fable but when planning work on a complex C codebase it's making more mistakes than 5.6 Sol xhigh for me. In what sce…
When an issue arises, I often test the systems by providing a minimal prompt, like: "this user, this is their email, this isn't working, figure it out in production." I send this to both Opus and ChatGPT, but it doesn't help. I've set up Agents.md and Quote.md identically, with the same access and linkers, so the Harness is consistent.
ChatGPT rarely succeeds. If the task is complex and requires a multi-step process to identify the true cause, ChatGPT usually stops after a few initial ideas and wrongly claims it has found the solution.
- For simple tasks, like identifying a missing item in a to-do list, ChatGPT performs well. - However, for issues like memory leaks or file system corruption, it struggles.
On the other hand, Opus 4.8 always finds the solution, albeit slowly. I can rely on it without worrying about whether it will succeed. It just gets the job done.
Recently, Fable 5 has emerged, which resolves issues without needing any prompts. It operates even faster than Opus.
When I ask ChatGPT or Opus to create a new feature: - ChatGPT often produces superficial results, ignoring existing code and building unnecessary independent code. - Interestingly, the outcome from ChatGPT appears functional, but it's usually incorrect, focusing on a superficial "aha!" moment.
Opus, however, plans thoroughly, executes, and cleans up, ensuring everything works correctly. If needed, I can provide more realistic examples, though it's challenging due to the monorepo's size and complexity, with hundreds of thousands of lines of code.