> GPT 5.6 Sol is the best "vision" model OpenAI ever released

I mean I should hope so, as it is also the latest one

> I can talk to Claude myself

OK but can you talk to my specific claude code conversation that has 6 months of context on the mechanism you are struggling with?

If you've been working on the issue for 6 months you should understand it well enough to answer in your own words.

I didn't say fix, I said context. As in "you are using an established thing the wrong way" which is most questions people ask. Edited

> The only thing a ban would do is protect the American market from further downward price pressure on inference, protecting VC investors in the short term

It won't even do this. Streisand effect will probably draw even more attention to the open weight models

The entire marketing narrative in AI already operates this way --- "GPT 2.0 is too dangerous to release, oh noooo!" etc

I remember something similar happening where software was going to be outlawed from export:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Zimmermann

After a report from RSA Security, who were in a licensing dispute with regard to the use of the RSA algorithm in PGP, the United States Customs Service started a criminal investigation of Zimmermann, for allegedly violating the Arms Export Control Act.[5] The United States Government had long regarded cryptographic software as a munition, and thus subject to arms trafficking export controls. At that time, PGP was considered to be impermissible ("high-strength") for export from the United States. The maximum strength allowed for legal export has since been raised and now allows PGP to be exported. The investigation lasted three years, but was finally dropped without filing charges after MIT Press published the source code of PGP.[6]

Never underestimate the stupidity of the US government.

I remember t-shirts with the DVD encryption key on them when the authorities tried to ban that. This shit always backfires. You'd think they'd know this by now.

I wonder what kind of result you'd get with floats

What I like is it's still hard, but you can do things like "prove this using game theory" or "find the optimal value for this and a proof" without having to know game theory or deep math really

How do you ensure that the output isn't BS if you don't know those areas? What value does it add to have a mathematical proof of questionable validity?

if you have an intuition something is true, you can verify the proof. even if you couldn't construct the proof. allowing skepticism to terminate thought is a dead end.

There used to be a lot of research into using deep NNs to train decision trees, which are themselves much less of a black box and can actually be reasoned about. I wonder where that all went?

History is littered with great ideas that lost people's interest and focus. A sad realization is that the focus may never return to them either.

Sounds like a vibe-coded feature if I ever heard of one

It's really gone to shit in the last 2 years

Very ironic for the billionaire to be openly replacing himself with AI, I suppose he believes his job is easy enough that an LLM can do it, so we definitely don't need him

Yes, exactly. Anyone training a model to replace themselves, is replacing themselves -- with something that can run 24/7 and can easily scale. And the better the model, the easier to replace.

Hence why I'm so surprised that MZ, of all people, is arguing in this direction.

I would think that the potential for malicious abuse alone should have scared him off of this.

We will never know if he is locked in his smart closet or just become a recluse.