4 ms·

I can't wait to never see a reasoning button ever again. Why do I have to reason about what reasoning level to use?

timpera 2mo ago
I think it's nice to be able to make the model reason for dozens of minutes when you want to go deep on a topic, even if the router thinks it's an easy question.
skybrian 2mo ago
Some people want quick results. Some people want it to keep searching for a new math proof overnight without giving up, and they have money to burn. It seems like giving it a time limit or a budget in dollars would be clearer, though? Or, keep searching until I come back to the computer and ask about progress.
- pllbnk 2mo ago
  The _Intelligence_ part of AGI should be able to guide the user through that without all the knobs.
  - vanuatu 2mo ago
    intelligence is not omniscience though
    - stymaar 2mo ago
      Asking questions to clarify user intent is a very low bar for intelligence. A bar that all SOTA models fail consistently at though. (It's both funny and legit infuriating when Opus, after having made a dozen wild assumptions without checking with you, then comes back with a request for clarification on some mundane topic).
      - vanuatu 2mo ago
        but you can keep asking questions ad infinitum very nontrivial problem knowing when to stop and making assumptions
        stymaar 2mo ago
        Yes, that requires some amount of intelligence, that's exactly my point.
  - minimaxir 2mo ago
    OpenAI tried auto-routing with the initial GPT-5 release and it was immediately clear why that was a bad idea.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
- dbbk 2mo ago
  I don't understand this at all. Whenever I ask Gemini 3.1 Pro Extended, or Claude 5 Max something in chat, the most I ever wait is maybe 30 seconds. Is that really so bad?
  - oceanplexian 2mo ago
    "Wait 30 seconds" as a concept has been totally incompatible with the web, smartphones, etc for about 20 years now.
  - vitorgrs 2mo ago
    If you just want to know "When it's the next full moon", yes. Very bad as google can answer in 1s.
    - dbbk 2mo ago
      That I just type into Google.
      - vitorgrs 2mo ago
        That's also using AI :). ChatGPT already competes with Google...
        dbbk 2mo ago
        I didn't say it didn't? Besides, for factual queries that don't need personalisation like that they can aggressively cache them.
awakeasleep 2mo ago
Because your incentives are opposed to the provider’s incentives
redox99 2mo ago
Because the model can't read your mind and know if you want a quick answer, or an hour long deep dive.
- Jtarii 2mo ago
  Then it should just ask the user what they want if its unclear from the context.
  - 2sk21 2mo ago
    Exactly! I posted much the same comment in another thread and there were lots of huffy complaints that amounted to "you're prompting it wrong"
  - Sammi 2mo ago
    That's what the reasoning slider is for!
  - redox99 2mo ago
    So instead of just getting an answer, I have to wait until it asks me, and I have to type back a response? Extremely annoying.
  - Marha01 2mo ago
    How is asking better than a reasoning slider?
egorfine 2mo ago
I absolutely need instant mode as this is what I use 90% of the time. Sadly it's not available anymore on the updated desktop app (formerly Codex) and the previous desktop app (formerly ChatGPT) is abandoned.
nojs 2mo ago
Auto-effort and similarly auto model routing suffer from a halting problem sort of issue: you don’t reliably know if a request is complex unless you use a complex model to make the decision.
miki123211 2mo ago
I have the opposite problem. I'm not well-calibrated on when I'd want lower reasoning than what's available to me (and how to compare that to lower-tier models). OpenAI now has Luna, Terra and Sol, each at Low, Medium, High and Xhigh, with Pro/Ultra depending on harness and plan. That's ~15 possible combinations of model and reasoning level, and there isn't a satisfactory explanation of which one you want for any particular task. I feel that work is basically split into two tiers, hard (which requires a good model and lots of reasoning by definition) and relatively easy (which won't consume much of my limits despite a great model and reasoning, so I may just as well keep it on Sol High).
- redox99 2mo ago
  Yeah, it's hard, there's so many permutations. But most are bad so it narrows it down. Luna: Can be useful if price sensitive, always use with AT LEAST high effort. But codex plans are very generous, so just ignore it. Terra: Forget it exists Sol: Just use this. Medium can work for specific edits. Otherwise just use high or xhigh. OpenAI basically agrees with this, and the slider gives you those options. TL;DR: Just use sol medium/high/xhigh
  - drivebyhooting 2mo ago
    Why not pro/ultra?
    - redox99 2mo ago
      Pro: It's web chat only, I haven't tried it so idk. I think it's useful for Math and that kind of stuff, but I only do programming. Ultra: Might be useful, the one time I tried it, it was extremely wasteful in terms of tokens. Definitely not a daily driver. There's also max effort, I think it can be useful but the gains compared to xhigh are quite small. I think max and ultra are only worth it when the others fail.
      - drivebyhooting 2mo ago
        It’s very confusing to me. I’ve occasionally used pro to do high-level research and design. Then I ask it to create a prompt for Codex ultra. Ultra can do a lot of genetic benchmarking and testing to elucidate and resolve quandaries. I don’t know if this is a good workflow.
customguy 2mo ago
just wait for the loot boxes, mark my words
visarga 2mo ago
> I can't wait to never see a reasoning button ever again. I hope to see a memory-less mode that is not incognito. Want fresh contexts sometimes, but also want to keep the chats saved in history. Memory can spoil some creative work, it dials the model in too tightly.

I think it's nice to be able to make the model reason for dozens of minutes when you want to go deep on a topic, even if the router thinks it's an easy question.

skybrian 2mo ago

Some people want quick results. Some people want it to keep searching for a new math proof overnight without giving up, and they have money to burn. It seems like giving it a time limit or a budget in dollars would be clearer, though? Or, keep searching until I come back to the computer and ask about progress.

pllbnk 2mo ago
The _Intelligence_ part of AGI should be able to guide the user through that without all the knobs.
- vanuatu 2mo ago
  intelligence is not omniscience though
  - stymaar 2mo ago
    Asking questions to clarify user intent is a very low bar for intelligence. A bar that all SOTA models fail consistently at though. (It's both funny and legit infuriating when Opus, after having made a dozen wild assumptions without checking with you, then comes back with a request for clarification on some mundane topic).
    - vanuatu 2mo ago
      but you can keep asking questions ad infinitum very nontrivial problem knowing when to stop and making assumptions
      - stymaar 2mo ago
        Yes, that requires some amount of intelligence, that's exactly my point.
- minimaxir 2mo ago
  OpenAI tried auto-routing with the initial GPT-5 release and it was immediately clear why that was a bad idea.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
dbbk 2mo ago
I don't understand this at all. Whenever I ask Gemini 3.1 Pro Extended, or Claude 5 Max something in chat, the most I ever wait is maybe 30 seconds. Is that really so bad?
- oceanplexian 2mo ago
  "Wait 30 seconds" as a concept has been totally incompatible with the web, smartphones, etc for about 20 years now.
- vitorgrs 2mo ago
  If you just want to know "When it's the next full moon", yes. Very bad as google can answer in 1s.
  - dbbk 2mo ago
    That I just type into Google.
    - vitorgrs 2mo ago
      That's also using AI :). ChatGPT already competes with Google...
      - dbbk 2mo ago
        I didn't say it didn't? Besides, for factual queries that don't need personalisation like that they can aggressively cache them.

awakeasleep 2mo ago

Because your incentives are opposed to the provider’s incentives

redox99 2mo ago

Because the model can't read your mind and know if you want a quick answer, or an hour long deep dive.

Jtarii 2mo ago
Then it should just ask the user what they want if its unclear from the context.
- 2sk21 2mo ago
  Exactly! I posted much the same comment in another thread and there were lots of huffy complaints that amounted to "you're prompting it wrong"
- Sammi 2mo ago
  That's what the reasoning slider is for!
- redox99 2mo ago
  So instead of just getting an answer, I have to wait until it asks me, and I have to type back a response? Extremely annoying.
- Marha01 2mo ago
  How is asking better than a reasoning slider?

egorfine 2mo ago

I absolutely need instant mode as this is what I use 90% of the time. Sadly it's not available anymore on the updated desktop app (formerly Codex) and the previous desktop app (formerly ChatGPT) is abandoned.

nojs 2mo ago

Auto-effort and similarly auto model routing suffer from a halting problem sort of issue: you don’t reliably know if a request is complex unless you use a complex model to make the decision.

miki123211 2mo ago

I have the opposite problem. I'm not well-calibrated on when I'd want lower reasoning than what's available to me (and how to compare that to lower-tier models). OpenAI now has Luna, Terra and Sol, each at Low, Medium, High and Xhigh, with Pro/Ultra depending on harness and plan. That's ~15 possible combinations of model and reasoning level, and there isn't a satisfactory explanation of which one you want for any particular task. I feel that work is basically split into two tiers, hard (which requires a good model and lots of reasoning by definition) and relatively easy (which won't consume much of my limits despite a great model and reasoning, so I may just as well keep it on Sol High).

redox99 2mo ago
Yeah, it's hard, there's so many permutations. But most are bad so it narrows it down. Luna: Can be useful if price sensitive, always use with AT LEAST high effort. But codex plans are very generous, so just ignore it. Terra: Forget it exists Sol: Just use this. Medium can work for specific edits. Otherwise just use high or xhigh. OpenAI basically agrees with this, and the slider gives you those options. TL;DR: Just use sol medium/high/xhigh
- drivebyhooting 2mo ago
  Why not pro/ultra?
  - redox99 2mo ago
    Pro: It's web chat only, I haven't tried it so idk. I think it's useful for Math and that kind of stuff, but I only do programming. Ultra: Might be useful, the one time I tried it, it was extremely wasteful in terms of tokens. Definitely not a daily driver. There's also max effort, I think it can be useful but the gains compared to xhigh are quite small. I think max and ultra are only worth it when the others fail.
    - drivebyhooting 2mo ago
      It’s very confusing to me. I’ve occasionally used pro to do high-level research and design. Then I ask it to create a prompt for Codex ultra. Ultra can do a lot of genetic benchmarking and testing to elucidate and resolve quandaries. I don’t know if this is a good workflow.

customguy 2mo ago

just wait for the loot boxes, mark my words

visarga 2mo ago

> I can't wait to never see a reasoning button ever again. I hope to see a memory-less mode that is not incognito. Want fresh contexts sometimes, but also want to keep the chats saved in history. Memory can spoil some creative work, it dials the model in too tightly.