GPT-5.5 • Hacker News Board

Re: GPT-5.5

#771

Post by zackify » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 2:54 AM UTC

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 pi.dev.

I get openai team plan at work.

Claude enterprise too.

I have openrouter for myself.

I use minimax 2.7. Kimi 2.6. And gpt 5.5 and opus 4.7. I can toggle between them in an open source interface that's how I stay able to not be trapped.

Minimax is so cheap and for personal stuff it works fine. So I'm always toggling between the nre releases

Re: GPT-5.5

#772

Post by noosphr » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 2:55 AM UTC

subhobroto wrote: post #729

cutler wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe people will finally take Marx seriously.

A lot of people already did. All their children and descendants now are staunch capitalists because they saw first hand the horrors of communism. I am from India and have friends who are immigrants from Russia, China and Cuba. We don't take lightly to being lectured about communism. We didn't move to the U.S., the bastion of capitalism, because communism had worked well for our grandfathers and parents and continues…

>All their children and descendants now are staunch capitalists because they saw first hand the horrors of communism.

As always there is a (post) Soviet joke that covers this:

>Communists lied about communism. Unfortunately they didn't lie about capitalism.

Re: GPT-5.5

#773

Post by litigator » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:00 AM UTC

brigandish wrote: post #763

merlindru wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I am from the UK and have not had this happen to me (Yet? perhaps)

Re: GPT-5.5

#774

Post by d0gsg0w00f » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:06 AM UTC

elAhmo wrote: post #431

dubcanada wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

grok is 17%? And that's the lowest, most models are like 80%+? While hallucination is probably closer to 100% depending on the question. This benchmark makes no sense.

No one serious uses grok.

Why not? Honest question.

Re: GPT-5.5

#775

Post by nmilo » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:10 AM UTC

endymi0n wrote: post #103

tedsanders wrote: post #19

Just as a heads up, even though GPT-5.5 is releasing today, the rollout in ChatGPT and Codex will be gradual over many hours so that we can make sure service remains stable for everyone (same as our previous launches). You may not see it right away, and if you don't, try again later in the day. We usually start with Pro/Enterprise accounts and then work our way down to Plus. We know it's slightly annoying to have to…

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…

On the other hand, I can ask codex “what would an implementation of X look like” and it talks to me about it versus Claude just going out and writing it without asking. Makes me like codex way more. There’s an inherent war of incentives between coding agents and general purpose agents.

Re: GPT-5.5

#776

Post by resident423 » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:16 AM UTC

gsich wrote: post #747

rafale wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone leaked nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union. What are the chances that someone leaks the "weights" of a (near-)singularity model?

Hopefully 1.

Why hopefully?

Re: GPT-5.5

#777

Post by itemize123 » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:17 AM UTC

louiereederson wrote: post #74

swyx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would chip affect token quantity. this is all models.

Chip costs strongly impact the economics of model serving. It is entirely plausible to me that Opus 4.7 is designed to consume more tokens in order to artificially reduce the API cost/token, thereby obscuring the true operating cost of the model. I agree though, I chose poor phrasing originally. Better to say that GB200 vs Tranium could contribute to the efficiency differential.

probably the wrong take - they are arm racing to a better model. it's not enshittification era for models just yet

Re: GPT-5.5

#778

Post by willsmith72 » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:24 AM UTC

jfkimmes wrote: post #122

Everyone talked about the marketing stunt that was Anthropic's gated Mythos model with an 83% result on CyberGym. OpenAI just dropped GPT 5.5, which scores 82% and is open for anybody to use. I recommend anybody in offensive/defensive cybersecurity to experiment with this. This is the real data point we needed - without the hype! Never thought I'd say this but OpenAI is the 'open' option again.

Being "more" open than something totally closed doesn't make you open. The name is still bs

Re: GPT-5.5

#779

Post by max2026 » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:32 AM UTC

[dead]

Re: GPT-5.5

#780

Post by zargon » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 3:35 AM UTC

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #374

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…

The model has been heavily encouraged to not run away and do a lot without explicit user permission. So I find myself often in a loop where it says "We should do X" and then just saying "ok" will not make it do it, you have to give it explicit instructions to perform the operation ("make it so", etc) It can be annoying, but I prefer this over my experiences with Claude Code, where I find myself jamming the escape key…

Shall I implement it?

no

https://gist.github.com/bretonium/291f4388e2de89a43b25c135b4...