alt Hacker NewsPreviewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
System card: https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/gpt-5-6-preview
Comments
If Claude Mythos and Fable 5 are the same underlying models just with different safeguards, I fail to see how TerminalBench has them at different scores.
The sooner the USG figures out a standard process for approving releases the better. There are many differing opinions on how much to regulate AI, but I think we can all agree ad-hoc policy sucks.
If it’s a “next generation model” then why isnt it GPT-6 and not just a minor version bump over 5.5?
Terra and Luna? Last time I had heard that, it didn’t end quite well
Will it also have hardcoded self-lobotomy if asked about cutting edge ML or LLM solutions? (Looking at Fable here)
I'm really getting sick of reading about safeguards and what I'm not allowed to do on every model release.
People where mocking EU for regulations and now this is happening in the US. I know that Europe is behind in AI but still...
If I, as a consumer can't access it, it might aswell be just a marketing hoax. I will believe it when I will be able to use it. IDK why companies publish blog posts about stuff that will come out in months...
It appears that between GLM-5.2 and GPT-5.6, anthropic is feeling the heat, atleast in the bang-for-the-buck heuristic?
I hope Sol doesn't get blocked like what happened with Fable.
I looked at the charts and it is clear that 88% from OpenAI is more than 88% from Anthropic.
Will it be accessible to anyone ?
> As part of our ongoing engagement with the U.S. government, we previewed our plans and the models’ capabilities ahead of today’s launch. At their request, we are starting with a limited preview for a small group of trusted partners whose participation has been shared with the government, before releasing more broadly.
The clowns in the US administration can barely remain coherent from one sentence to the next.
Having them be the gatekeepers of technological progress in 2026 is fucking lame.
What happened to the nano/mini/standard/pro naming scheme, which worked perfectly fine and is intuitive to understand? Why does OpenAI insist on having the most inconsistent and confusing model and product names possible?
I'm looking at you Codex.
Like Mythos before it, I'm simply not excited about a model I can't use
Would love to see benchmarks on cognition's FrontierCode
Sol? Looks like openai is jealous of anthropics good model naming ability and wants to emulate it.
I do not like the fact that this forces people to remember one more hierarchy of "Sol vs Terra vs Luna". OpenAI was supposed to simplify their naming since at least 2025.
Love the name!
I didn't know that I was color blind, but thanks to those charts, I think I need to see a doctor...
I mean, you can read them even without the colors, but who on earth thought that those are a good set of colors? Oh, I forgot it was probably someone on 'Sol'.
so where is gemini ? are u alive?
Haven't we established defensive and offensive security usage are intractably entangled? I.e. "patch all [security] bugs, make no mistakes" gives one a list of potential exploits to hand off to less capable models.
Doesn't that undermine all good-faith discourse on cybersecurity safeguards, controlled usage etc? Or is that overstating the case (I'm not a security researcher myself so kinda parroting).
Boring and Gay.
I'm going to pre-register my prediction that GPT-5.6 Sol is significantly behind Claude Fable 5, as evaluated by general consensus once time has passed for people to get familiar with both.
Seems like OpenAI's strategy to release models after Anthropic has been paying off.
Is it just me, or does it seem like Anthropic has been more of a pioneer the past few years, and OpenAI tries to copy features they like?
The language used in this press release is borderline hilarious. It’s simultaneously trying to tell you how great it is while also telling it’s not THAT great. Nothing to worry about, move along.
Sol, Terra, Luna? They are trolling (ragebaiting) with their naming now
Is there any model that rivals Opus or Fable? I would like to try something else, as Anthropic is pretty suss.
we expect substantial benefit for legitimate defensive work, while meaningfully constraining prohibited offensive use.
Also just making the model better at code is just making it better to writing offensive code.
No comments on the cerebras version that might finally enable intelligent voice mode instead of being stuck with 4o-mini class
Other than the worst naming I have ever seen (Sol / Terra / Luna), the pricing is still expensive:
> GPT‑5.6 is priced per 1M tokens across three model sizes:
> Sol is $5 input / $30 output;
> Terra is $2.50 input / $15 output
> Luna is $1 input / $6 output.
The OpenAI casino has never been more ready to take your money on gambling even more tokens.
Pre-official discussions:
Not really news until it's widely available.
Anyone know the latest around Fable being re-released after gov smackdown?
FUCK the US government. That's it, I am rooting for China now
Thoughts
1. Naming convention is copied from Anthropic and honestly is more catchy than a number (amongst normal people)
2. How in the world did Anthropic have to do all the theatrics about Mythos just to have OpenAI release an equivalent or stronger model a month later without any drama???
3. Cheaper models are just don’t fit any usecase imo and OpenAI knows it so they keep increasing the floor - I’m still convinced task per capability is reduced with each release
4. How in the world would open source models keep up with the multi layer security? Either this security is all theater or we will finally see a ceiling in open source models because by definition they can’t have those protections
5. Cybersecurity things are boring to me because it’s all zero sum cat and mouse games
Are GPT 5.5 and Opus 4.8 the last models we're going te be allowed to use in Europe? Is there going to be a cut, and we're only be allowed to use less capabale models outside of the US?
I mean, if they deem Fable 5 to powerful to share with the rest of the world, what's left for us?
Let us protect the world from a big slop
Sun Earth Moon
Another model family, another naming scheme to get used to.
Sol Ultra ≈ Pro
Sol ≈ Standard
Terra ≈ Mini
Luna ≈ Nano
> For GPT‑5.6 and later models, cache writes are billed at 1.25x the model’s uncached input rate, while cache reads continue to receive the 90% cached-input discount.
Not them joining Anthropic with this bullshit. *
Caching infrastructure is already a leaky abstraction over a feature that is not as reliable or debuggable to the end user as it should be, charging for the 'privilege' of interacting with it is really annoying.
(* for reference on 'this bullshit': ChatGPT previously didn't require anything special for a basic level of caching. Unless you wanted extended cache times, it'd just "do the right thing" and try to use nodes that had your prefix already cached in memory)
It's only next generation? Anthropic has frontier models! lol
AI is just autocomplete. -> AI must be regulated. -> We want AI.
A question I always have is, how to the AI labs safeguard the leak of their model? Training a cutting edge model basically cost a minimum of hundreds of millions of dollars. And its all contained within a file. Okay, that file might be 500GB large, but its still just one blob that is worth almost a billion dollars. And they need to train new models every few weeks, have lots of people with access to it to debug it, run inference etc. I wonder when we will see the first leaks? Imagine if e.g. Opus 4.8 got leaked. Wouldnt that bankrupt Anthropic?
GPT-5.6 Sol. 5.7 Luna. 5.8 Mars. Meanwhile my code still runs on GPT-3.5 and nobody noticed.