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

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.5

#761

Post by kobieps »

mikestorrent wrote: post #537
noosphr wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I am still trying to figure out the business model of open weights. Like... it's wonderful that there are open LLMs, super happy about it, good for everyone, but why are there these? What is the advantage to their companies to release them?

Balaji's "AI OVERPRODUCTION" post is the most compelling thesis that I've come across

Re: GPT-5.5

#762

Post by hx8 »

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.

I use Open Code as my harness. It's open source, bring your own API Key or OAuth token or self-hosted model. I've jumped from Opus 4.6 to Opus 4.7 to GPT 5.5 in the last 7 days. No big deal, intelligence is just a commodity in 2026.

The actual harness is great, very hackable, very extendable.

Re: GPT-5.5

#763

Post by brigandish »

merlindru wrote: post #689
unsupp0rted wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't OpenAI get mad if you ask cybersecurity questions and force you to upload a government ID, otherwise they'll silently route you to a less capable model? > Developers and security professionals doing cybersecurity-related work or similar activity that could be mistaken by automated detection systems may have requests rerouted to GPT-5.2 as a fallback. https://developers.openai.com/codex/concepts/cyber-safety h…

Anthropic has started to ask for IDs for use of their products period I don't like that trend. I get why they're doing it, but I don't like it

Are you in the UK? I've not had this happen to me (I'm not in the UK) so I'm wondering if the Online Safety Act has affected this, as it has with other products.

Re: GPT-5.5

#764

Post by xutopia »

dcre wrote: post #725
an0malous wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The premise of the trillion dollars in AI investments is not that it’ll be as good as it currently is but cheaper. It’s AGI or bust at this point.

Why is AGI required to make the investments work out?

With AGI we expect a huge return on investment and a GDP growth that could be accelerating at a rate we couldn't even comprehend. Imagine an algorithm that improves itself each iteration and finds ways to increase its capacity every day. Robots suddenly capable of doing dishes, grocery shopping, picking produce from the field. Imagine all your ailments handled... age becomes just a number.

Also with AGI we expect a winner take all situation. The first AGI system would protect itself against any other AGI system. Hence why it's go time for all these AI companies and why they stopped sharing their research.

Re: GPT-5.5

#765

Post by dannyw »

simianwords wrote: post #237
tedsanders wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, it's more expensive per token. However, I do want to emphasize that this is per token, not per task. If we look at Opus 4.7, it uses smaller tokens (1-1.35x more than Opus 4.6) and it was also trained to think longer. https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-4-7 On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index eval for example, in order to hit a score of 57%, Opus 4.7 takes ~5x as many output tokens as GPT-5.5, w…

Maybe a good idea to be more explicit about this -- maybe a cost analysis benchmark would be a nice accompaniment. This kind of thing keeps popping up each time a new model is released and I don't think people are aware that token efficiency can change.

Their subscription subscribers will see/feel the difference irregardless, API pricing is hopefully read by devs that know about token efficiency and effort.

Re: GPT-5.5

#766

Post by PilotJeff »

So exhausted from all this endless bs…. Keep releasing , this reminds me of all the .com software during that era where wow we are already at version 3.0 it’s only been 60 Days

Re: GPT-5.5

#767

Post by rao-v »

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.

Paging Dr. Susan Calvin!

Re: GPT-5.5

#768

Post by boppo1 »

deaux wrote: post #558
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Google does release mini open versions of their models. https://deepmind.google/models/gemma/gemma-4/

And they're incredibly good for their size.

Which, unfortunately is still slow unusable garbage compared to fronteir models.

Re: GPT-5.5

#769

Post by thrawa8387336 »

Melatonic wrote: post #562
noosphr wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority are released by socialists, and by socialist I mean the People's Republic of China. Which everyone seems to forget is a socialist country working towards world communism. They are a prestige propaganda tool on par with the space race. On top of that they insert a subtle pro-socialist bias in everything they touch. Ask deepseek about the US economic system for a blatant example. Now think what something a…

Is China even really communist? If anything they seem to be fairly on the Capitalist side but just a bit opposite on the spectrum of the US. And much more authoritarian

Just nationalist with focus on community?

Re: GPT-5.5

#770

Post by thrawa8387336 »

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?

Apparently the cost/price is 20x in the major providers. Not clear how it is a business
Post reply on HN