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

GPT-5.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.5

#521

Post by ransom1538 »

_alternator_ wrote: post #330

> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…

"when the tokens run out, I'm basically done working."

Oh stop the drama. Open source models can handle 99% of your questions.

Re: GPT-5.5

#522

Post by oezi »

Night_Thastus wrote: post #294
mudkipdev wrote: post #160

This is 3x the price of GPT-5.1, released just 6 months ago. Is no one else alarmed by the trend? What happens when the cheaper models are deprecated/removed over time?

This is entirely expected. The low prices of using LLMs early on was totally and completely unsustainable. The companies providing such services were (and still are) burning money by the truckload. The hope is to get a big userbase who eventually become dependent on it for their workflow, then crank up the price until it finally becomes profitable. The price for all models by all companies will continue to go up, and…

I recently looked at this a bit but came away with the impression that at least on API pricing the models should be very profitable considering primarily the electricity cost.

Subscriptions and free plans are the thing that can easily burn money.

Re: GPT-5.5

#523

Post by TacticalCoder »

gck1 wrote: post #434
aliljet wrote: post #161

I've found myself so deeply embedded in the Claude Max subscription that I'm worried about potentially makign a switch. How are people making sure they stay nimble enough not to get trarpped by one company's ecosystem over another? For what it's worth, Opus 4.7 has not been a step up and it's come with an enormously higher usage of the subscription Anthropic offers making the entire offering double worse.

Start building your own liteweight "harness" that does things you need. Ignore all functionality of clients like CC or Codex and just implement whatever you start missing in your harness. You can replace pretty much everything - skills system, subagents, etc with just tmux and a simple cli tool that the official clients can call. Oh and definitely disable any form of "memory" system. Essentially, treat all tooling th…

> You can replace pretty much everything - skills system, subagents, etc with just tmux and a simple cli tool that the official clients can call.

I'm very interest by this. Can you go a bit more into details?

ATM for example I'm running Claude Code CLI in a VM on a server and I use SSH to access it. I don't depend on anything specific to Anthropic. But it's still a bit of a pain to "switch" to, say, Codex.

How would that simple CLI tool work? And would CC / Codex call it?

Re: GPT-5.5

#524

Post by nemo44x »

astlouis44 wrote: post #9

A playable 3D dungeon arena prototype built with Codex and GPT models. Codex handled the game architecture, TypeScript/Three.js implementation, combat systems, enemy encounters, HUD feedback, and GPT‑generated environment textures. Character models, character textures, and animations were created with third-party asset-generation tools The game that this prompt generated looks pretty decent visually. A big part of th…

It’s like all these things though - it’s not a real production worthy product. It’s a super-demo. It looks amazing until you realize there’s many months of work to make it something of quality and value.

I think people are starting to catch on to where we really are right now. Future models will be better but we are entering a trough of dissolution and this attitude will be widespread in a few months.

Re: GPT-5.5

#525

Post by konfusinomicon »

_alternator_ wrote: post #330

> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…

soooooo about Claude going down. we're gonna need you to sign in on Saturday and make up for lost time or unfortunately we're going to have to deduct the time lost from your paycheck. and as an aside your TPS reports have been sub-par as of late..is everything OK?

Re: GPT-5.5

#527

Post by sigbottle »

superfrank wrote: post #519
ofjcihen wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this comparison made constantly and for me it misses the mark. When you use abstractions you are still deterministically creating something you understand in depth with individual pieces you understand. When you vibe something you understand only the prompt that started it and whether or not it spits out what you were expecting. Hence feeling lost when you suddenly lose access to frontier models and take a look…

> When you use abstractions you are still deterministically creating something you understand in depth with individual pieces you understand Hard disagree on that second part. Take something like using a library to make an HTTP call. I think there are plenty of engineers who have more than a cursory understanding of what's actually going on under the hood.

It might just be social. When I use the open source http library, much of the reason I use it is because someone has put in the work of making sure it actually works across a diverse set of software and hardware platforms, catching common dumb off by ones, etc.

Sure, the LLM theoretically can write perfect code. Just like you could theoretically write perfect code. In real life though, maintenance is a huge issue

Re: GPT-5.5

#528

Post by noosphr »

_alternator_ wrote: post #330

> One engineer at NVIDIA who had early access to the model went as far as to say: "Losing access to GPT‑5.5 feels like I've had a limb amputated.” This quote is more sinister than I think was intended; it likely applies to all frontier coding models. As they get better, we quickly come to rely on them for coding. It's like playing a game on God Mode. Engineers become dependent; it's truly addictive. This matches my o…

LLMs upend a few centuries of labor theory.

The current market is predicated on the assumption that labor is atomic and has little bargaining power (minus unions). While capital has huge bargaining power and can effectively put whatever price it wants on labor (in markets where labor is plentiful, which is most of them).

What happens to a company used to extracting surplus value from labor when the labor is provided by another company which is not only bigger but unlike traditional labor can withhold its labor indefinitely (because labor is now just another for of capital and capital doesn't need to eat)?

Anyone not using in house models is signing up to find out.

Re: GPT-5.5

#529

Post by Rapzid »

butlike wrote: post #260
endymi0n wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you guys do anything about GPT‘s motivation? I tried to use GPT-5.4 API (at xhigh) for my OpenClaw after the Anthropic Oauthgate, but I just couldn‘t drag it to do its job. I had the most hilarious dialogues along the lines of „You stopped, X would have been next.“ - „Yeah, I‘m sorry, I failed. I should have done X next.“ - „Well, how about you just do it?“ - „Yep, I really should have done it now.“ - “Do X, righ…

This brings up an interesting philosophical point: say we get to AGI... who's to say it won't just be a super smart underachiever-type? "Hey AGI, how's that cure for cancer coming?" "Oh it's done just gotta...formalize it you know. Big rollout and all that..." I would find it divinely funny if we "got there" with AGI and it was just a complete slacker. Hard to justify leaving it on, but too important to turn it off.

We are closer to God than AGI.

When AGI arrives, it'll be delivered by Santa Claus.

Re: GPT-5.5

#530

Post by sho_hn »

simondotau wrote: post #499
Jtarii wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What's the worst potential outcome, assuming that all models get better, more efficient and more abundant Complexity steadily rises, unencumbered by the natural limit of human understanding, until technological collapse, either by slow decay or major systems going down with increasing frequency.

It’s always been thus at lower layers of abstraction. Only a minority of programmers would understand how to write an operating system. Only a tiny number of people would know how a modern CPU logically works, and fewer still could explain the electrical physics.

> Only a minority of programmers would understand how to write an operating system. Only a tiny number of people would know how a modern CPU logically works, and fewer still could explain the electrical physics.

I'd say this is true for programmers at, say, 20, but they spend the next four decades slowly improving their understanding and mastery of all the things you name, at least the good ones.

The real question is whether that growth trajectory will change for the worse or the better.

To be clear, this is not an AI doomerist comment, because none of us have spent enough time with the tech yet. I've gone down multiple lanes of thought on this, and I have cause for both worry and optimism. I'm curious to see how the lives of engineers in an AI world will look like, ultimately.

Post reply on HN