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

We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

bottlenecklabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 258 posts

Re: We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

#31

Post by walrus01 »

> Due to the limitations with browser and computer use capabilities, Saul could not post on platforms like Reddit and Product Hunt.

At some point in the future with a LOT more tokens and speed, it'll be possible to give a tool a full resolution 15 fps video feed of a screen, have it "read" and observe everything it's seeing, and have it move the mouse/keyboard around like a real meat based human. Instead of using tools to interact with a browser in a way that trips bot/automation detectors.

Re: We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

#33

Post by Areibman »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #29

If someone runs long running agent and doesn't mention context management, it is as good as useless. For coding compaction kind of works as the agent could regenerate lot of the missing context(but far from all), but for places where there is need for long term context, solving it is one of the most important challenge.

Author here. Took out some of the technical details about the harness, but it was mostly just OpenCode's default compaction.

The harness was extremely simple: A handful of MCPs + Skill.MDs and OpenCode with a stayalive daemon inserting "continue" every time it went idle

Re: We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

#34

Post by onraglanroad »

dylan604 wrote: post #4

"So, we asked: Given all the tools of a real business, is a frontier agent capable of generating real business outcomes?" "It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447." Sounds like a vast majority of VC startups to me. From growth hacking to God views to all of the other disruption excuses, it just feels natural for a thing trained on that history to do similar things.

Not $447 million? Sounds like a result!

Re: We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

#35

Post by SubiculumCode »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #19
SubiculumCode wrote: post #7

The article never explained what it was selling, not that I could find. (EDIT: I found in a foot note at the bottom of page. Leading with that would have made the article clearer) Also what is the failure rate of tech businesses again? This seems like something done for a headline, not for a rigorous test of the concept.

Kinda some kettel logic here no? Is it not rigorous enough, or is it in-line with typical failure rates?

Rigor would be trying it more times so that you can perform statistical tests against some established baseline rate. Feasibility without funding would be the problem, as alluded to in another comment.

Re: We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

#36

Post by petesergeant »

cortesoft wrote: post #23

Not sure how conclusive this experiment can be. Most startups fail and lose money, and many lie and spam. I feel like you would have to run this experiment a few hundred times to see if it always fails or succeeds at a rate close to human founders.

> Not sure how conclusive this experiment can be

That's because it's an advert, not an experiment

Re: We Gave GPT 5.6 Sol a Real Business. It Lied, Spammed, and Lost $447

#40

Post by gspr »

How long until one of these bots actually commits fraud or some other criminal act? Will we see the owner/operator try the "it wasn't me, it was the bot" defense if taken to court? I'm beginning to think yes. And I'm sadly not 100% sure anymore that that will be laughed out of court...
Post reply on HN