| ▲ | bentt a day ago |
| While this isn't great for users it seems like a pretty standard circling of the wagons in preparation for the next phase in the battle for frontier AI dominance. Ironically, as a Cursor and Claude subscriber, but not an OpenAI subscriber, this will push me back to Anthropic. I don't feel good about giving OpenAI money directly, but I've found switching to GPT 5.6 Sol now and again in Cursor to be useful. Now I'll probably just forget about OpenAI models. |
|
| ▲ | reilly3000 a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think they are betting that Astra will be impossible to ignore. |
| |
| ▲ | bentt a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd need to have a problem I couldn't solve with current models for my eyes to wander. | | |
| ▲ | znnajdla a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah I haven’t had a problem yet which was too difficult for Fable to solve. I do have problems which Sol does not do well on. But if I could get Fable-level intelligence faster/cheaper and less restricted, that’s all I need. | | |
| ▲ | cheeze a day ago | parent [-] | | Fable is great minus it's annoying writing style. It's nowhere near as bad as Opus 5 but it's very "AI trope-y" even with heavy steering. I can spot the writing immediately. |
| |
| ▲ | akmarinov a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What if it’s cheaper too? | |
| ▲ | dakolli a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yeah not sure why everyone thinks they need a PhD lvl assitant to build their slop SaaS when an open source model that is 100x cheaper, and 3x faster and arguably still "PhD" level assitant could also build their slop SaaS. |
| |
| ▲ | SoftTalker a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | For three months, until the next SOTA model drops. And with each improved model, the number of people who actually need it declines. | | |
| ▲ | ronsor a day ago | parent [-] | | Exactly. Astra will likely get its Mythos moment, and then another Chinese lab releases its equivalent three months later while Anthropic releases a newer, better model. | | |
| ▲ | dakolli a day ago | parent [-] | | There's a reason why most businesses don't hire PhDs, they dont need it. PhDs are cheap in many countries, arguably more affordable than a full time mythos lvl agent, yet businesses in India still don't hire 30k a year PhDs to run their businesses. Its simply not necessary. AI labs have lost the plot from a business perspective. If chasing ASI is the goal, that also seems stupid.. Putting all of your customers out of business with ASI doesn't really lead to great outcomes either. They're commodity fetishism maxxing. | | |
| ▲ | Game_Ender a day ago | parent [-] | | The higher level models are designed to tackle bigger problems with less oversight and more accuracy. It’s about entirely changing how you use them to mirror an employee you can trust. A truly good team members everyone trusts to just get things done at high quality with minimal direction for days or weeks. That is the goal. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ifwinterco a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s OpenAI (and Anthropic I’m sure) realising that they’ve somehow ended up stuck in the lowest margin part of the stack (providing inference), and trying to get out of it |
|
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | oh_no a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| you dont like giving openai money but you're fine with spacex? not criticizing, just trying to understand. |
| |
| ▲ | bentt 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Honestly, I've been a Cursor subscriber for a while and it was just momentum. Still, I rank OpenAI as the worst actor among the big AI companies. I think OpenAI's playbook will be a repeat of Facebook. Users are the product x 1000. Cursor/SpaceX/Grok is a different beast. I think they will cheat other companies but I'm not convinced yet that they have it out for users. We'll see. I'm certainly not some kind of Cursor lifer or something. We should all move to OpenCode anyway. :) | | |
| ▲ | PretzelPirate 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's my personal view that Elon has already shown how little he cares for protecting data of individuals based on how he ran DOGE. If his teams will handle the data of US citizens with such disregard, he'll almost certainly treat his customers (many of whom are those same US citizens) the same. | | |
| ▲ | bentt 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sure, that's a thing. But it's much different than building a multiyear strategy to use that data as the financial basis of one's entire operation. |
| |
| ▲ | ronsor 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I used to think OpenAI was the only bad actor until I realized they were the only honestly corporate actor. The other AI companies obfuscate their goals much better. | |
| ▲ | verdverm 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm not keen on OpenCode long term after seeing their CEO engage in antics and their discord being rather unprofessional, but it is a great harness for the time being, still has gaps though |
|
|
|
| ▲ | DustinBrett a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Same, this will make me drop Sol from my options, not Cursor. |
|
| ▲ | chr15m a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Why would you possibly allow companies to push you? You are the customer and you should control which models you use. |
| |
| ▲ | ezfe a day ago | parent [-] | | Because one is better or worse? What else do you think they meant? | | |
| ▲ | chr15m a day ago | parent [-] | | OP said: > as a Cursor and Claude subscriber, but not an OpenAI subscriber, this will push me back to Anthropic Instead of deciding based on the merits of the model, they are being pushed by the actions of the companies. You should be able to use the best model, or whatever model you like, independently of what any company thinks or does. | | |
| ▲ | lawrjone a day ago | parent [-] | | They are deciding on the merits of the model right? They’re picking the model that’s supported in most tools. I think maybe you’re suggesting private companies should be forced to support all models which is a position that isn’t technically feasible or one that most would agree is even a sensible ideal. | | |
| ▲ | chr15m a day ago | parent [-] | | No, companies can do whatever they want. They shouldn't be forced to support all models. I'm suggesting you shouldn't let a company dictate which models you use. Putting yourself in a position where they can is detrimental, because you miss out on using the best model for the job. |
|
|
|
|
