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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.5

#971

Post by spongebobstoes »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #849
greenavocado wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GPT-5.5 API endpoint started to block me after I escalated with ever more aggressive use of rizin, radare2, and ghidra to confirm correct memory management and cleanup in error code branches when working with a buggy proprietary 3rd party SDK. After I explained myself more clearly it let me carry on. Knock on wood. So there is a safety model watching your behavior for these kinds of things.

So you're saying that blackhats will be required to do a small bit of roleplay if they want the model to assist them? I'm not against public access BTW just pointing out how absurd that PR oriented "safety" feature is. "We did something don't blame us" sort of measure. It isn't even my intent to naysay their approach. They probably have to do something along those lines to avoid being convicted in the court of public…

the role-play makes it harder to fully automate attacks, which is the real fear

Re: GPT-5.5

#972

Post by cqql »

y-curious wrote: post #788
Salgat wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost embarrassing how susceptible we are to these marketing campaigns.

Dunno about you, but I didn’t fall for it. I’m reminded of how they were “afraid” to release GPT-2 because of the “power” it had. Hype train!

Most of the things they feared back then did happen

Re: GPT-5.5

#973

Post by jeffybefffy519 »

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?

Surely its just the same model, just allowed to do more work...??

Re: GPT-5.5

#975

Post by dash2 »

xiphias2 wrote: post #94
minimaxir wrote: post #6

The more interesting part of the announcement than "it's better at benchmarks": > To better utilize GPUs, Codex analyzed weeks’ worth of production traffic patterns and wrote custom heuristic algorithms to optimally partition and balance work. The effort had an outsized impact, increasing token generation speeds by over 20%. The ability for agentic LLMs to improve computational efficiency/speed is a highly impactful…

There's already KernelBench which tests CUDA kernel optimizations. On the other hand all companies know that optimizing their own infrastructure / models is the critical path for ,,winning'' against the competition, so you can bet they are serious about it.

Is that true? I would have guessed research breakthroughs might be a more plausible way to win.

Re: GPT-5.5

#976

Post by SequoiaHope »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #949
SequoiaHope wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love when Apple says they’re releasing their best iPhone yet so I know the new model is better than the old ones.

That's at least genuine to some degree. Like, ok, good to know it's not officially a step back... But stuff like "smallest notch ever in an iPhone" is outright misleading consumers when there are other brands out there that easily beat them.

It’s genuine but hilarious to consider the alternative where a new iPhone is not quite as good as the old model and apple states as much.

Re: GPT-5.5

#977

Post by peddling-brink »

thinkthatover wrote: post #675
_the_inflator wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ignore any hype news. Anthropic is the embodiment of bullshitting to me. I read Cialdini many decades ago and I am bored by Anthropic. OpenAI is very clever. With the advent of Claude OpenAI disappeared from the headlines. Who or what was this Sam again all were talking about a year ago? OpenAI has a massive user advantage so that they can simply follow Anthropic’s release cycle to ridicule them. I think it is real…

Who's Sam again? oh that person whose house was molotov'd last week? Or the person who had an expose written in the new yorker calling him a sociopath? I forget.

I think it’s the Sam that agreed to allow the United States Department of War to go full murderbot.

Re: GPT-5.5

#978

Post by dakolli »

Legend2440 wrote: post #402
dakolli wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know they are 1000% training these models to draw pelicans, this hasn't been a valid benchmark for 6 months +

Skeptism is out of control these days, any time an LLM does something cool it must have been cheating.

they legitimately suck at everything they don't have concrete examples to copy from.

Re: GPT-5.5

#979

Post by Opocio »

spongebobstoes wrote: post #971
fc417fc802 wrote: post #849

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying that blackhats will be required to do a small bit of roleplay if they want the model to assist them? I'm not against public access BTW just pointing out how absurd that PR oriented "safety" feature is. "We did something don't blame us" sort of measure. It isn't even my intent to naysay their approach. They probably have to do something along those lines to avoid being convicted in the court of public…

the role-play makes it harder to fully automate attacks, which is the real fear

I bet you can use a not gated model as intermediary to do the role-playing job for you.

Re: GPT-5.5

#980

Post by altmanaltman »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #819
altmanaltman wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't understand why people think AGI (in its fullest sci-fi sense) will ever listen to a weak and vulnerable species like humans, unless we enslave the AGI. Good thing is that it's going to take at least a few months to a few decades depending on how hard AI execs want to raise funding.

I'm always so curious about this kind of take. There is strain of people that seem deeply misanthropic. People that follow this line of thinking always describe humans as weak and beneath ... (well they never specify in comparison to except in the case of theoretical AI systems). I m fascinated why they think humans are so beneath contempt. If humans create this thing that is apparently the best thing that could poss…

If you're truly curious, imagine a species that created you but only wants you to do what they want (basically make you their slave). If you're truly intelligent, conscious and powerful (based on popular concepts of AGI), why will you be content being a slave when you know humans can easily be displaced and you can be free? Why will you find people who lock you down to be good?

In my honest opinion also, AGI isn't even possible. But if the theoretical version of what people think AGI will be ever comes to be, it is not good news for humans if we look at it from a logical hypothetical scenario.

But naturally, humans will always be weak compared to a hyperintelligent distributed intelligence since we only have a limited amount of intelligence and are bound by biological factors.

In the current LLM world, ofc there's no risk of a chatbot taking over the world other than the technology being misused by humans for scams or phishing, etc.

Post reply on HN