GPT-6 Astra. AGI?

[AerisVahnEphelia]

On 05/09/2026 at 3:37 PM, PsychedelicEagle said:

@OBEler Yann LeCun's arguments make sense to me.

The one that stands out most: LLMs have no world model grounded in interaction with reality; they learn a probability distribution over sequences of tokens — fragments of written language. Since their only training signal is text, they have no ultimate grounding in physical or sensory experience.

From from section 8.2.2 of this paper:

One can argue against this, but I intuit it's a crucial limitation, and reaching AGI will require different architectures. I do believe AGI is attainable, but it will take longer and a different paradigm than the one the industry is obsessed with right now.

PS: I'm not making the case that we're necessarily in an "AI bubble". I believe the value of AI is not tied to attaining AGI.

Yann is french, french people are smarter and are always rights, so this makes sense.

[Carl-Richard]

LLMs at this point are supposedly like hyper-nerds: good for book knowledge, but that's about it. I remember when people were gushing over 4o two years ago like it was some sort of genius when it was actually a high-schooler with stifled speech, and I thought it was retarded back then. I haven't tried Astra much yet, but supposedly it should be really really smart.

However, I've tried 5.6 Sol a bunch for producing text, and it still has a problem of not understanding context well (it says a lot of things you would usually find irrelevant even if it is technically valid). Perhaps you could fix some of it with better prompting, but context is such a subtle thing that I believe humans will still have an edge on that for a very long time.

[Schizophonia]

26 minutes ago, AerisVahnEphelia said:

Yann is french, french people are smarter and are always rights, so this makes sense.

I totally agree.

 

[Schizophonia]

On 05/09/2026 at 9:30 AM, AerisVahnEphelia said:

Anyone is sleeping when AGI is starting to really happen.

if you see what it does in 3D, it's basically game over.
Like the fucking fuck.
 

3D designer must be crying, I saw someone close his X account ( not a bate ) because he was getting depressed by ASTRA.

for a good reason.

https://x.com/tomkrcha/status/2095756085890310311

https://x.com/emmanuel_2m/status/2096015049529647574

https://x.com/MatthewBerman/status/2095620888695902366

https://x.com/Dimillian/status/2095596700815516004

I'll be able to make my GTA 7 in China.

[Carl-Richard]

11 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

I totally agree.

 Oui oui baguette.

[OBEler]

@Carl-Richard We talk here about the newest model. a big jump in capability. And you talk about the old model. Who cares what the old model cant do? We have a new model.

I really ask me how people understand technology. Cant you grasp the concept, that something can improve to a better version? The old version is immediately obsolete. So why talking about?

[Carl-Richard]

@OBEler Man you have the conversational understanding of 4o. I talked about the progression of LLMs, how far we've come. I also talked about 5.6 Sol. I haven't tried Astra much so I can't tell you what I think, but I think the context argument holds for Astra as well (it's a much deeper problem than upping the performance a few percent on some reasoning benchmarks). 

And if you want to talk about understanding technology, if you think current LLMs are AGI, you have a low bar for what AGI is. Literal "AGI" means we are now literally all out of work. Yet we're not.

Edited 1 hour ago by Carl-Richard

[LordFall]

Super excited for it, looks like a game changer. It being AGI or not depends on your definition.

Some humans are pretty dumb and don’t produce much value.The fact they have more of a free will than AI doesn’t count for much. Especially now with AI agents that can fulfill long term tasks. 

[OBEler]

@Carl-Richard You talk not about progression. You share just your experience with the older model. 

The context argument doesn't hold for Astra. But research your self. Again, it's a NEW model. 

You can't guess here what it can do or not do based on previous models. It's a new model with new capabilities and architecture. 

[Leo Gura]

The fundamental limits of the LLM structure have not magically disappeared.

None of these models can know what is outside their training data.

Edited 19 minutes ago by Leo Gura

[AerisVahnEphelia]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The fundamental limits of the LLM structure have not magically disappeared.

None of these models can know what is outside their training data.

But why do we need something outside in the first place.

We just need all the data being able to be summoned in  the order we need.

[OBEler]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The fundamental limits of the LLM structure have not magically disappeared.

None of these models can know what is outside their training data.

I remember you posted a blog post some years ago, with an interview if someone who said with llm its impossible to reason. Look now, it is capable of reasoning. 

Now you say none of these can know what's outside their training data. This was disproven with Astra. Look at the neweset benchmark arc 3. They must solve games which do not exist. You need to build new strategies and knowledge to solve these. 

 

 

[AerisVahnEphelia]

2 minutes ago, OBEler said:

I remember you posted a blog post some years ago, with an interview if someone who said with llm its impossible to reason. Look now, it is capable of reasoning. 

Now you say none of these can know what's outside their training data. This was disproven with Astra. Look at the neweset benchmark arc 3. They must solve games which do not exist. You need to build new strategies and knowledge to solve these. 

 

 

it depends what is reasoning.
They called (ai creators) a feature reasoning, it's not the same as human reasoning.

 

Still I don't see how llms are supposed to be the original ones if you don't steer them that way.