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

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 433 posts

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#421

Post by killix »

nolok wrote: post #398
fny wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain what you find useful about ultracode? I've become wary of agent swarms since the early days and now just prefer to have a single agent spin for hours at time. Parallelism never got me anywhere worthwhile.

Not parent but I find them great for analysis amongst other, to have each agent handle only its parts and bring back any issue even if it's clarified in other parts because that specific agent doesn't know about that, and the orchestrator is then on charge of handling that and making sure things are clarified in each parts that needs it without depending on side effect or side knowledge. Same with code really but on…

[flagged]

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#422

Post by senordevnyc »

bigyabai wrote: post #96
DenisM wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It stops being interesting, or even sad, after a while. People get stuck in all kinds of places, mentally. Some get unstuck eventually. It’s only sad if you have come to a counter factual belief that it could have gone better. I went in the opposite direction - how far can I push myself to see multiple facets of a story? That is a wild ride, and it gets progressively more wild.

> how far can I push myself to see multiple facets of a story? Please, I'm dying to hear the optimist's take on Mark Zuckerberg's career. It wouldn't happen to be embarassingly foolish, would it?

It sounds like you’re definitely willing to approach it with curiosity.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#423

Post by bigyabai »

senordevnyc wrote: post #422
bigyabai wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how far can I push myself to see multiple facets of a story? Please, I'm dying to hear the optimist's take on Mark Zuckerberg's career. It wouldn't happen to be embarassingly foolish, would it?

It sounds like you’re definitely willing to approach it with curiosity.

Certainly, if someone is willing to defend him with veracity.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#424

Post by satvikpendem »

versteegen wrote: post #331
satvikpendem wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Amusing, this is the first time I've seen someone get flagged for quoting the guidelines.

I am vindicated.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#425

Post by unparagoned »

rowanG077 wrote: post #386
brookst wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Tell me why it’s different without using circular reasoning?

They're different mechanisms. Teaching modifies the learner. Prompting doesn't modify the model. It provides additional context that influences a single inference. A person who has learned something can apply it years later without being reminded. An LLM generally cannot unless the knowledge is incorporated into the model itself or provided again.

A human requires sleep the update their mental model to use that learning years later.

Take a human and prevent them from sleeping after covering a fact then years later they won’t know it.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#426

Post by unparagoned »

rowanG077 wrote: post #369
embedding-shape wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The big problem is that a person making a mistake can be taught to not make that mistake again. That's also not foolproof but at least it works a lot of the times. AI are unteachable, if you have given them a good prompt and they do something wrong 90% of the time you are shit out of luck. I feel like this line of thinking is kind of an unfair comparison. I'm not saying LLMs are magical beings that can suddenly lea…

I'm not against the prompt being changed, the point I was making is that an LLM is prone to the exact same mistakes even if you change the prompt. A trivial example is the very basic character counting mistake, I just asked chatgpt: > How many p are in strawperry? > There are 0 “p”s in strawperry. And I can trigger the same mistake with various words even when adjusting the prompt many times. So I cannot teach chatgp…

You probably should test your fake scenarios before making claims on how what llms do.

Why is it that almost every time someone makes a claim it turns out wrong when tested

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#427

Post by DenisM »

bigyabai wrote: post #423
senordevnyc wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you’re definitely willing to approach it with curiosity.

Certainly, if someone is willing to defend him with veracity.

You seem to inhabit a hero/villaim dichotomy, and a narrative one at that. It’s not a place I wish to revisit.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#428

Post by rowanG077 »

unparagoned wrote: post #425
rowanG077 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're different mechanisms. Teaching modifies the learner. Prompting doesn't modify the model. It provides additional context that influences a single inference. A person who has learned something can apply it years later without being reminded. An LLM generally cannot unless the knowledge is incorporated into the model itself or provided again.

A human requires sleep the update their mental model to use that learning years later. Take a human and prevent them from sleeping after covering a fact then years later they won’t know it.

sleeping helps learning, but people can learn without sleep. You can teach something to a person and they can usually do it immediately in some capacity. If you prevent a person from sleeping they will have reduced capacity to remember things. But it will most certainly not be zero.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#429

Post by layla5alive »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #362
petesergeant wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not as conspiratorial as you, but it does seem the tide of opinion here is turning against Amodei, for no particularly obvious external reason. At the same time, there does seem to be at least some evidence of adversarial attempts to oppose data-centers by America's competitors.

At my company we are pretty certain that a lot of datacenter opposition is being instrumented and funded by the PRC. AI is a bid for control of all humanity. The first to superintelligence owns our future. I'd say it's okay to be a bit suspicious or conspiratorial of anti-AI/anti-lab narratives.

So you think we should be suspicious of anti-AI narratives, but not of.. overt race by corporations to "control all of humanity" ?!?

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

#430

Post by layla5alive »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #335
Der_Einzige wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This line of thinking is ontologically evil, life denying, and it and its believers should be rejected and fought with extreme prejudice.

I'm sorry, you're right! What was I even thinking? Of course we should hand every man, woman, and child a mini nuke!

A Mythos class model is not a nuke.

I'd wager 99.99% of humanity would not want to start a nuclear war by vaporizing millions of people, animals, etc. with a nuke. They'd back away slowly and figure out how to ensure it was safely disposed of so they didn't need to be near it or worry about it.

A very small number of people would like to have a nuke with which to harm other people.

Some of those people even probably got that way because of actions taken by people saying things like "if we don't do it, somebody worse will" and "we are the only ones who can be trusted to control this power"

Post reply on HN