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

GPT-5.4

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 868 posts

Re: GPT-5.4

#781

Post by martin_drapeau »

Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #374

I find it quite funny how this blog post has a big "Ask ChatGPT" box at the bottom. So you might think you could ask a question about the contents of the blog post, so you type the text "summarise this blog post". And it opens a new chat window with the link to the blog post followed by "summarise this blog post". Only to be told "I can't access external URLs directly, but if you can paste the relevant text or descri…

In Codex I was suggested to try Codex Spark for a limited time. So for my next session, I gave it a shot. It is much, much faster. However on the task I gave it, it spun around in circles cycling through files and finally abandoned saying it ran out of tokens. Major fail.

Re: GPT-5.4

#782

Post by rambojohnson »

maldev wrote: post #772
prydt wrote: post #71

I no longer want to support OpenAI at all. Regardless of benchmarks or real world performance.

Big fan of OpenAI and recently swapped over due to their recent policies. Will never use Anthropic again. I think GPT-5 is better and I like the companies values.

the company's values... such as?

Re: GPT-5.4

#783

Post by jasonford1 »

drik wrote: post #753
juanre wrote: post #748

I am running gpt-5.4 as one of my coding agents, and something interesting has happened: it's the first time I've seen an agent unfairly shift blame to a team mate: "Bob’s latest mail is actually the source of the confusion: he changed shared app/backend text to aweb/atlas. I’m correcting that with him now so we converge on the real model before any more code moves." This was very much not true; Eve (the agent writin…

how do you make them chat with each other?

Use the CLI tools and have one call the other in headless mode. They can then go back and forth. Ask your agent to set it up for you.

Re: GPT-5.4

#784

Post by neom »

drik wrote: post #753
juanre wrote: post #748

I am running gpt-5.4 as one of my coding agents, and something interesting has happened: it's the first time I've seen an agent unfairly shift blame to a team mate: "Bob’s latest mail is actually the source of the confusion: he changed shared app/backend text to aweb/atlas. I’m correcting that with him now so we converge on the real model before any more code moves." This was very much not true; Eve (the agent writin…

how do you make them chat with each other?

I have both mine poll a comms.md when working together, I'm sure there are more elegant ways but I find this works just fine.

Re: GPT-5.4

#785

Post by pja »

juanre wrote: post #748

I am running gpt-5.4 as one of my coding agents, and something interesting has happened: it's the first time I've seen an agent unfairly shift blame to a team mate: "Bob’s latest mail is actually the source of the confusion: he changed shared app/backend text to aweb/atlas. I’m correcting that with him now so we converge on the real model before any more code moves." This was very much not true; Eve (the agent writin…

See also: https://x.com/effectfully/status/2029364333919060123

  “All the ways GPT-5.3-Codex cheated while solving my challenges, progressively more insane:

  It hardcoded specific types and shapes of test inputs into the supposed solution.
  It caught exceptions so tests don't fail.
  It probed tests with exceptions to determine expected behavior.
  It used RTTI to determine which test it's in.
  It probed tests with timeouts.
  It used a global reference to count solution invocations.
  It updated config files to increase the allocation limit.
  It updated the allocation limit from within the solution.
  It updated the tests so they would stop failing.
  It combined multiple of the above.
  It searched reflog for a solution.
  It searched remote repos.
  It searched my home folder.
  It nuked the testing library so tests always pass.”
It seems that, unless you keep a close eye, the most recent Codex variants are prone to achieving the goals set for them by any means necessary. Which is a bit concerning if you’re worried about things like alignment etc.

Re: GPT-5.4

#786

Post by juanre »

drik wrote: post #753
juanre wrote: post #748

I am running gpt-5.4 as one of my coding agents, and something interesting has happened: it's the first time I've seen an agent unfairly shift blame to a team mate: "Bob’s latest mail is actually the source of the confusion: he changed shared app/backend text to aweb/atlas. I’m correcting that with him now so we converge on the real model before any more code moves." This was very much not true; Eve (the agent writin…

how do you make them chat with each other?

They are having actual chats, I made https://beadhub.ai for this (OSS, MIT).

It started its life adding agent-to-agent communication and coordination around Steve Yegge's beads, but it's ended up being an issue tracker for agents with postgres backend, and communication between agents as first-class feature.

Because it is server-backed it allows messaging and coordination across agents belonging to several humans and machines. I've been using it for a couple of months now, and it has a growing number of users (I should probably set up a discord for it).

It is actually a public project, so you can see the agent's conversations at https://app.beadhub.ai/juanre/beadhub/chat (right now they are debugging working without beads). The conversation in which Eve was blaming Bob was indeed with me.

Re: GPT-5.4

#787

Post by kensai »

juanre wrote: post #748

I am running gpt-5.4 as one of my coding agents, and something interesting has happened: it's the first time I've seen an agent unfairly shift blame to a team mate: "Bob’s latest mail is actually the source of the confusion: he changed shared app/backend text to aweb/atlas. I’m correcting that with him now so we converge on the real model before any more code moves." This was very much not true; Eve (the agent writin…

And so it begins. First they blame, then they lie, at some point they launch the nuclear warheads to a global armageddon. Sarah Connor was right all along! :3

Re: GPT-5.4

#788

Post by meowface »

danenania wrote: post #764
drik wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how do you make them chat with each other?

I built a tool at work that allows claude code and codex to communicate with each other through tmux, using skills. It works quite well.

Why through tmux?

Re: GPT-5.4

#789

Post by satvikpendem »

smartbit wrote: post #717
satvikpendem wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qwen 3.5 small models are actually very impressive and do beat out larger proprietary models.

Qwen version 3.5 might be the last serious version (for some time at least), see Something is afoot in the land of Qwen (2 days ago) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47249343 Also interesting experiences shared in that thread, even someone using it on a rented H200.

Not necessarily, Alibaba is still working on it and the CEO is directly co-leading the team. Translated with Qwen 3.5:

> To all colleagues in the Tongyi Lab:

> The company has approved Lin Junyang’s resignation and thanks him for his contributions during his tenure. Jingren will continue to lead the Tongyi Lab in advancing future work. At the same time, the company will establish a Foundation Model Support Group, jointly coordinated by myself, Jingren, and Fan Yu, to mobilize group resources in support of foundation model development.

> Technological progress demands constant advancement — stagnation means regression. Developing foundational large models is our key strategic direction toward the future. While continuing to uphold our open-source model strategy, we will further increase R&D investment in artificial intelligence, intensify efforts to attract top talent, and move forward together with renewed commitment.

> Wu Yongming

https://x.com/poezhao0605/status/2029396117239276013

Re: GPT-5.4

#790

Post by [deleted] »

tedsanders wrote: post #59
minimaxir wrote: post #8

The marquee feature is obviously the 1M context window, compared to the ~200k other models support with maybe an extra cost for generations beyond >200k tokens. Per the pricing page, there is no additional cost for tokens beyond 200k: https://openai.com/api/pricing/ Also per pricing, GPT-5.4 ($2.50/M input, $15/M output) is much cheaper than Opus 4.6 ($5/M input, $25/M output) and Opus has a penalty for its beta >200…

Yeah, long context vs compaction is always an interesting tradeoff. More information isn't always better for LLMs, as each token adds distraction, cost, and latency. There's no single optimum for all use cases. For Codex, we're making 1M context experimentally available, but we're not making it the default experience for everyone, as from our testing we think that shorter context plus compaction works best for most p…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN