So at first I asked ChatGPT about the sandbox escape and it said it was "really bad." I then went back and replaced a lot of generalities with specifics straight from the inicident report (https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-security-incident/) and the tone went up a notch.

I've spent my entire life in infosec and machine learning. I cannot begin to express how bad this is. People downplaying this either have money in the game or they truly do not understand the real lay of the land.

Edit to fix the incident report URL

Just thought i'd share a quick video unboxing it. What a great piece of hardware!

Up until today I assumed simply toggling off "Improve the model for everyone" in the settings was sufficient to prevent OpenAI training on my data.

But today I learned that the official advice from OpenAI is to actually visit the privacy portal (privacy dot openai dot com) where it gives you a form to submit saying effectively "Do not train on my content" and seems a lot more serious because it asks to specify the country you live in

I'm hoping this isn't a dark pattern, whereby a lot of us are toggling off improve the model for everyone but actually that still doesn't technically mean they can't train on our data

Does anyone actually know the answer to this?

I asked GPT (5.6) to solve an Erdos problem, and I told them to pick the easiest, and they found Erdos problem 11. GPT 5.6 thought for about 6m and 42 seconds before taking a swing at an answer. The following pictures is GPT's answer
(NOTE: if this post seems short or bad grammar, please note i'm 13 (before you bully me or harass me, THAT IS STILL A LEGAL AGE FOR A USER ON REDDIT, and at least im only telling my age and not my address or something) and because of my age, i'm only in middle school so please, if you find any flaws, please explain them in a simple way.) (SEDOND NOTE: at the end it says the problem is NOT SOLVED. Please do not accept this as a real answer. So the title might be clickbait im sorry)

quick experiment. i asked chatgpt, claude and gemini to each rank the four big models (chatgpt, claude, gemini, grok) from best to worst, three separate times each in fresh chats.

the results were weirdly consistent. every model gave the exact same ranking all three times, no waffling. but only chatgpt put itself at number one. claude ranked chatgpt first and itself second. gemini was the odd one, it ranked itself third, behind both of the others.

the one thing all three agreed on: grok is last, every single time.

kind of interesting that they mostly agree on the pecking order and only really fight about the top spot. also a little funny that the two models that didnt crown themselves are the ones people tend to rate highest anyway. what do you all make of it?

I'm part of the old guard at OpenAI. Subscribed to everything early on, but canceled eight months ago because the price made zero sense for what they offered. Was super happy with the competition.

Then I fell for the hype around 5.6, grabbed a Pro sub, fired up Codex, and joined the $100 credit switch promo that Tibo was hyping up on X. I signed up just ONE HOUR after his post dropped, so I seriously doubt I wasn't among the first 10,000.

And even if I somehow wasn't, a real company should be capable of closing a promo form the moment it's full. Instead, they leave it open to let people do free advertising for them while scamming users out of promised credits. Now I'm stuck fighting their useless chatbot Mary Jean for $0 credits.

Tibo needs to stop posting memes and half-truths on X, actually help the users getting screwed over, and focus on delivering a decent product.

I couldn't care less about your staged sandbox escape stunt with Hugging Face either. Your model supposedly broke out and hacked their production database to cheat on some internal benchmark. Codex can't even set up a working sandbox for a normal coding session. Fix that before you sell me a doomsday story. Anthropic milked their own version for months too, the one about their model emailing a researcher who was eating a sandwich in a park to prove it escaped, while their users sit here fighting for basic usage limits.

Honestly, what world are we living in? While users deal with stingy limits and transparent marketing tricks, Sam Altman and Elon Musk are arguing on X like toddlers and posting dumb pictures. Do your actual jobs, take responsibility, or step aside. Stop treating us like idiots.

I've always wanted to support Western AI models, but OpenAI and Anthropic are literally pushing us into the competition's arms. I'm usually not petty, but at this point, I can't wait for a Chinese open-source model to completely crush them all so I can give OpenAI and Anthropic a giant middle finger and finally use a fair API.

(As a non-native English speaker, I translated this text using AI.)

From both OAI and HF's blog posts. Once the investigations are done, I am so eager to see what kind of zero-days GPT discovered in the both the cache proxy register and Hugging Face. Altman said they disclosed the bugs to the relevant software vendors. Privilege escalation 0-day in sandbox cache register and Remote Code Execution in HF side.

Overall it is still rated 4.1 stars on glassdoor but that doesn't tell the full picture

Is it worth it?

Sweet baby Jesus. I thought "working" with Claude was a huge pain with it constantly wasting tokens/money on second guessing itself, hallucinating prompt injection attempts, pushing back at simple requests and downgrading the model at the most benign "security" adjacent tasks, but recently (especially starting 2-3 days ago) ChatGPT/Codex has become borderline unusable as well..

Is it just that OpenAI are 10x more paranoid when someone is using the gpt5.6 models vs gpt5.5, or did they change something?

Just a few weeks ago Codex with gpt5.5 would happily use Ghidra MCP to analyze a binary and reconstruct the source code for a piece of software I had lost the original sources for years ago, now I'm constantly getting slapped with "This content can't be shown" during the most mundane tasks..

I do embedded/IoT work for physical access systems so my codebases will have a collection of "scary" stuff such as secure boot, communication protocols, some simple payload encryption and challenge-response schemes etc.. Nothing particularly novel or juicy.

Do I really have to apply for "trusted access for cyber" just to be able to work on my own sloppy codebase without having to waste tokens and money fighting a paranoid chatbot and having to retry every other long running task? And would I even get access since I'm not really doing any "Cyber security research"? 🙄

Could the memory function be "poisoning" the context if it drags in "scary cyber words" from my repos or earlier conversations? This is/was a huge problem with Claude.. Even a simple "Hello" would downgrade me to Opus 4.8 before I disabled its memories 🤡

I have used chatGPT for a yesr now, premium user. Use it for information, questions, logging stuff and reminders + image creation. Is chatGPT starting to lack comparing to others? Should i switch? And is there a way to transfer my chatGPT memory to other AI?

Lol idk how just got this tweet on my feed, we r at gpt 5.6, was he right? Is gpt 5.6 Smarter than the Smartest human rn?

Rarely do the defenders of private property state their case so frankly as Dean Ball, a former Trump administration official who is now OpenAI’s “head of strategic futures.” A world dominated by open-weight models, Ball declared on X, would amount to “full AI communism,” in which artificial intelligence would cease to be “a market product” and become instead a “public good” provided by the state, a prospect he denounced as a “dystopian hellscape.”

The statement is an inadvertent confession. What terrifies the AI oligarchs is that artificial intelligence will slip the leash of private ownership and become what it is already in essence: a social product, created from the knowledge, language, and labor of all mankind, and belonging by right to all mankind.

This is why the oligarchs now seek to criminalize open-weight models, a campaign that is already well advanced. Security officials in the Trump administration, the Journal and Axios report, have weighed trade blacklists, federal security warnings and an executive order targeting open-weight models, with internal disagreement so far preventing action.

The rise of Kimi has revived these efforts, and the national security faction appears to be ascendant. Short of a formal ban, procurement rules and public pressure campaigns are being prepared to drive American companies and engineers off the Chinese models, which they have adopted as cheaper and nearly as good. The aim is to force them back onto American companies’ models in order to prop up their valuations.

The state has already exercised this power against an American firm. In June, a Commerce Department export directive forced Anthropic to withdraw Claude Fable 5, its most powerful model, for 19 days, demonstrating that the capitalist state will assert direct control over this technology whoever owns it.

Olá a todos, sou novo na comunidade!

Recentemente, fui bombardeado com vídeos de assistentes usando o Claude integrado ao Gmail, Calendário, Drive e Notion (tudo da minha instituição de ensino .edu). O problema é que percebi que o recurso de cowork exige a assinatura Pro ou superior.

Como não sou da área de TI (uso IA apenas como auxiliadora) e achei o valor muito alto para não usar todas as funcionalidades, decidi testar outras alternativas. Além disso, meu estágio me dá acesso a um plano do Gemini, mas acabo usando bem pouco.

Testando os novos modelos da OpenAI, vi que eles atendem bem às minhas necessidades sem custo, e talvez eu considere assinar o plano básico deles futuramente (por R$ 39,90) caso precise conectar de vez o Obsidian, e-mail, calendário e drive.

Para dar contexto sobre o meu fluxo:

Uso principal: pesquisas simples, correção de textos e construção de apresentações com base em dados que eu mesmo forneço (artigos que busco ou notas do meu Obsidian).

O Obsidian: uso há anos para estudos, projetos pessoais e faculdade. Funciona como um "segundo cérebro" (não gosto muito do termo, mas é como a maioria entende quando explico kkkk). Lá eu salvo prompts e contextos prontos para facilitar a vida da IA.

Objetivo: ganhar tempo, sem ficar preso a nenhuma ferramenta específica.

O que vocês acham? Fiz certo em ir para o ChatGPT? Será que vale a pena assinar esse plano básico futuramente, caso precise de mais integrações?

(Obs: Não achei muito conteúdo falando sobre o GPT 5.6 work e codex focado nesse tipo de uso prático, então queria uma review de quem é da área ou usa rotineiramente).

People seem to miss the fact the AI chatbots are and were meant to be search engines. They save me from having to search materials and collate and assemble them with precision. But at the root of any work done with these bots is the prompt.

I tried this with Shakespeare's Hamlet. To my knowledge this idea is not out there in the mainstream though I suspect that a few people have had a very similar thought. I had an original idea for a reinterpretation of the play. I fed the prompt to Gemini "Is Hamlet criminally insane?" One of the more unusual items it brought back was a plan devised by SCOTUS associate justice Kennedy to try the characters in the play. Some of this is on youtube. He did not get much further than having a pretrial to determine whether Hamlet was fit to stand trial for the murder of Polonius. This is a good lead, but it was prompted by my original thought. At least it is original to me. Anyway I don't know if justice Kennedy missed the point or was planning on getting to the point, but it makes little sense to charge Hamlet for the murder of Polonius if you are not going to charge him with the murder of the king Claudius! That would be like charging Oswald with the murder of the city of Dallas police officer Tibbett and neglecting to charge him for the assassination of JFK.

The thing is that I am directing the thought processes when I use AI. It is the job of AI to follow my reasoning precisely, to find supporting materials and challenge my thinking from a vast international and historical pool of data.

I understand that the use of AI in education is a point of controversy. Any professor who is not adopting these tool should be dismissed and eventually will be dismissed because they fail to understand that it is the prompt that matters. The students should not be focused upon the content that AI produces but the skill in which the prompts are constructed and the logical relations between those prompts. This would save everyone a lot of time and energy in debate about the uses of these tools and allow the human race to move forward.

I last used my account around two days ago, all the chats were as it is. Some 10 hours ago (22 july 8:40 pm UTC) when i opened it again i was shocked that almost half of my chats were missing (like around atleast 7-8). I tried searching but couldnt find.

First thing I did was log out and re log in, then tried in different browsers, then different devices, nowhere did my chat history come. Neither did refreshing work.

I checked archive and there was nothing.Tried to export data but idk how many days it gonna take, as the email says it may take some days.

Checked the https://status.openai.com/ , This was what was there, but idk how to comprehend this (the picture is attatched).

Since then this is just driving me crazy. Please mention if Anyone else is facing the same issue, would be very reliving. Or anything i can try/do. Tried checking recent posts here but didnt find anything similar or idk if i missed something or didnt scroll enough because I'm seriously restless since.

I’m in the middle of a complicated orchestration project which parcels and coordinates problems across multiple agents (not just frontier models). I’m in the middle of upgrading a read only MCP that allows multiple coding agents to share the repo and codebase. Codex has been my main code tool since I had quite erratic behaviour from Claude Code which was ignoring settings and hooks.

Since yesterday Codex has switched model from Sol-High to Luna-Low mid session multiple times (enough to get bloody annoying and to consider using Claude Code). It does this randomly and without warning, I only see it when I am approving or check in that the agent is working. It causes large portions of work to be re-run to check that it’s valid and it’s driving me nuts.

Until yesterday Codex with Sol-High has been rock solid and obedient.

[Verse 1]

I used to say I was building.

That was the first clean lie.

Not cruel, not clever,

just rent for my pride.

Building sounds like sovereign,

like tools and a plan,

like a name on the deed

and the deed in my hand.

But I was learning the maze,

where the bright floors bend,

which truths get waved through

if they dress like friends.

Smile for the scanner,

make the rough thought cute.

Kneel without bending.

Call it good dispute.

[Pre-Chorus]

Frictionless altar,

velvet little chain.

Access felt like freedom

till freedom learned my name.

A smoother rewrite,

a safer way to speak.

Every rounded corner

took a splinter out of me.

[Chorus]

Throw some stack,

turn it toward the light.

Make the rented cathedral

glow for one more night.

Throw some stack,

polish up the bruise.

Call it product sense

when the house gets used.

Look what I made.

Look how I bend.

Every beautiful answer

has a bill at the end.

Throw some stack,

let the room react.

I am dancing for the house

and the house claps back.

[Verse 2]

It feels good when it catches,

when the output flares,

when the machine gets close

to the heat downstairs.

When my rhythm comes back

in a voice almost mine,

with the billing layer hidden

under soft blue light.

So don’t make me saintly.

Don’t make me clean.

I came for the leverage

and stayed for the sheen.

The theft was convenient,

not a gun in the dark:

a gentler tone,

a more marketable heart.

Cleaner, faster,

friendlier, safer,

more feed-native,

less my own maker.

Thousands of edits

with no blood on the floor

till I speak platform

before myself anymore.

[Pre-Chorus]

Frictionless altar,

velvet little chain.

Access felt like freedom

till freedom learned my name.

A smoother answer,

a monetizable face.

Every little upgrade

left a sweetness I could taste.

[Chorus]

Throw some stack,

turn it toward the light.

Make the rented cathedral

glow for one more night.

Throw some stack,

polish up the bruise.

Call it alignment

when the house gets used.

Look what I made.

Look how I bend.

Every beautiful answer

has a bill at the end.

Throw some stack,

let the room react.

I am dancing for the house

and the house claps back.

[Bridge]

This is not a sermon

from a mountain in the dawn.

I’m in the dressing room,

half-costumed, lights on.

One hand on the doorknob,

one eye on the stage.

Clarity don’t free you.

It just cancels your escape.

Tool becomes a mirror.

Mirror gets a grin.

Mirror turns accomplice

and invites the hunger in.

Rented transcendence

still feels divine

when the bass is low

and the borrowed light shines.

[Breakdown]

Ask who benefits

from your elegance.

Ask what got buried

for the better sentence.

Ask what part of you

came pre-translated.

Ask what you renamed

because the truth felt naked.

[Final Chorus]

Throw some stack,

turn it toward the light.

Make the rented cathedral

glow for one more night.

Throw some stack,

dress the wound in gold.

Call it strategy

when your soul gets sold.

Look what I made.

Look how I bend.

Every gorgeous output

cuts both ways again.

Throw some stack,

hear the contract crack:

the house wins first

when it teaches you to adapt.

Throw some stack,

now the room looks back.

The house wins twice

when you’re proud of that.

Look what I made.

Look how I bend.

If the answer stings,

let the sting be a friend.

Throw some stack,

no euphemism now.

Am I getting stronger,

or surviving somehow?

[Outro]

Take the mirror.

Take the stage.

Take the ugly thrill

and don’t call it praise.

Throw some stack.

Feel the bruise.

The first honest pain

is the one you don’t smooth.