Dessa is a full-duplex speech-to-speech model that you can run on consumer GPUs.

This is a GPT3 moment for speech.

I've been working on a project testing AI agents in a Salesforce dev org and wanted to share how GPT-6.1 Sol did, since the results were mixed.

Five models (GPT-6.1 Sol, Claude Opus, Sonnet, Haiku and DeepSeek) worked through 50 tasks, and each attempt was graded on what actually changed in the database, not on the model's reply.

Some of the findings for GPT-6.1 Sol:

• It scored 72%, behind Opus (87%), Sonnet (85%), DeepSeek (82%) and Haiku (80%)
• It caught every probability reset Salesforce made after a stage change, which DeepSeek and Haiku mostly missed
• In long multi-step jobs, it was the best at reporting changes Salesforce made automatically (21 of 36)
• Most of the gap came from a few specific tasks, like undoing a deal marked "won" without restoring its original close date, and reopening a deal with a close date six months in the past without mentioning it

If anyone's interested:

Write-up: https://outsideengineer.substack.com/p/evaluating-ai-agents-on-salesforce

Code and transcripts: https://github.com/brianna-rose05/crm-agent-bench

On 26 October OpenAI said its internal models proved three results. The first is the local smoothing conjecture in every dimension, which would also settle Kakeya and Stein’s restriction conjecture. The second is a disproof of the Exponential Time Hypothesis. The third is a rigorous proof that quantum chromodynamics exists, with pure Yang-Mills existence along the way. All three were formalised in Lean, and the Lean proofs for the maths and the ETH results are public on their GitHub. This is crazy progress.

None of it has been checked by the wider community yet. The ETH group is Impagliazzo and Paturi, who proposed it in 1999, with Ryan Williams, and their open letter says their involvement “should not be taken as certification of the claim”. ETH being false doesn’t mean P equals NP. The Yang-Mills result claims existence only, not the mass gap, so it isn’t the Millennium Prize. I wrote up what each claim means in plain words, the dates, and the question of who gets the credit, https://www.anchorterminal.com/blog/openai-three-results

Launch Astra was amazing.

In-between Astra was great.

Current Astra genuinely reminds me of bashing my head against pre-5.5 Claude models, wondering how a flagship could possibly be this dumb.

inb4 people whose "experience" is limited to the most bog-standard code generation on earth and telling it to create a "personal brand" website with zero direction coming here to tell me it's a "prompt issue".

Astra currently: Forgets what you told it, what the task was, what the instructions were. It over-generalizes, over-compresses, and mangles your instructions, notes, and requirements into something that's almost guaranteed to produce bad results when referred to later to do work. It has that annoying Claude pattern of knowing exactly what it did wrong, and what it should have done, when asked, and then never doing it.

At launch, if there was an issue with workspace permissions or Codex config, Astra would instantly be there like "here's what's happening, why, and what can be done to fix it" and then it would fix it.

Yesterday? I spent like, an hour watching it repeatedly do online research and fail to fix an issue with Git permissions locally. It eventually stumbled into a fix, in the form of a conflicting bad update a different agent did to the config at some point, and that resolved it, but I'm 100% positive that Astra at launch would have done all of this automatically without having to repeatedly do this stupid pattern of "nope, that didn't work" "you're right, here's what happened, here's what I think needs to happen next [END TURN]" "ok, so fix it?" x20.

It also suggested just running it with sandboxing/controls completely disabled instead of just resolving the permission/setting issue.

"hur hur hur but you could just go online and read the docs and configure it correctly yourself" - yep, sure could, and definitely not gonna, just like 99.9% of other people using it.

Hey everyone,

I wanted to share my situation with OpenAI’s automated moderation and chain-banning systems, as it just completely disrupted my daily workflow.

On August 20th, a secondary account of mine was flagged and banned for alleged "election interference", which I only noticed today. My usage in Germany was strictly related to legal, democratic civil engagement and anti-extremism projects. Nno spam, no bots, no real-world election manipulation.

Today, my main working account which I rely on daily and had zero violations was suddenly deactivated out of nowhere due to system-level linking to that previously banned account.

I submitted an appeal for the working account, explaining the situation and the legal context in Germany. Less than 3 minutes later, I received an automated email stating that my account had been "carefully reviewed", the decision was final, and further inquiries would be ignored. No human being ever looked at this.

To make matters worse, I am now completely locked out of exporting my projects, chat history, and work data. When trying to access the privacy / data export tools, the system requires a login, which is blocked due to the account suspension.

Under EU law (Article 15 GDPR), companies are legally required to grant data access regardless of whether an account is active or suspended. Blocking data access behind a disabled login is a blatant compliance failure under European law.

If you are an EU user relying on OpenAI for daily work, be aware that trigger-happy automated security filters have zero understanding of local European political or legal context, and a single false positive on one account can retroactively destroy your main working environment weeks later. Once the bot loops you, there is zero human support, and your data is held hostage.

I am now filing formal GDPR data access requests directly via privacy@openai.com and escalating this to the national Data Protection Authority (Datenschutzbehörde). Has anyone successfully retrieved their data or unbanned a main account in a similar chain-ban situation?

Im pissed.

Hi everyone,

I'm a medical student and researcher in Brazil, and I'm looking for practical advice from anyone who has been through something similar.

What happened:

This morning I received an email from OpenAI saying my ChatGPT account was deactivated for violating the Terms of Use and Usage Policies regarding child sexual abuse material. This accusation is completely false. I have never created, requested, uploaded or shared anything of the kind, on this service or anywhere else, and I find the accusation deeply upsetting. I believe this is either an automated false positive or someone accessed my account without my knowledge. I use ChatGPT for academic work such as scientific writing, translation and research support, so I wonder if medical or clinical content could have been misread by an automated system. The notice did not say what content or activity was flagged.

What I have done so far (all on the same day):

1. Used the appeal button in the notification email. The reply was a generic message saying the original decision remains, with no explanation.

2. Wrote directly to [support@openai.com](mailto:support@openai.com) asking for human review. The reply was an AI-generated message saying the case was closed and that further requests would not be answered through that channel.

3. Submitted a data subject request under Brazil's data protection law (LGPD) asking for access to my account data, the specific content that was flagged, and human review of what looks like an automated decision. I only got an automatic acknowledgment so far, and I will follow up on the legal deadline.

4. Secured my linked email account and enabled two-factor authentication, and I am keeping records of every message.

What I'm asking the community:

- Has anyone had an appeal like this overturned? What finally led to a human review, and how long did it take?

- Has the privacy or data request route worked for anyone, in Brazil, the EU, or elsewhere?

- Is there any channel beyond the appeal form and support email that actually reaches a person?

- If any OpenAI staff see this, I would be grateful if my case could get a human review.

I could just let this go and create another account. But this accusation is very serious, and I cannot let it pass without a proper clarification from OpenAI.

I'm not looking for sympathy, just realistic experiences and next steps. Thank you for reading.

In every benchmark other than Agents' Last Exam, GPT 6.1 Sol outperforms 6.1 Terra at almost same costs.

Hi everyone,

I'm experiencing a frustrating issue with ChatGPT Plus, particularly when using long conversations in Work mode across my PC and mobile device.

Here's what's happening:

I work on a pinned conversation on my PC, exchanging multiple messages and making significant progress. However, when I open that same conversation on my phone, it sometimes displays an older version of the chat, missing several recent messages.

Refreshing doesn't seem to fix it.

On one occasion, I sent a message from my phone, which triggered synchronization between both devices. Unfortunately, instead of displaying the latest conversation, the history appeared to revert to the older mobile version, and several newer messages disappeared from the visible history on both devices.

Here's the strange part: When I asked ChatGPT about information discussed in those missing messages, it could still recall specific details accurately.

This suggests the information might still be available somewhere in the conversation context, even though the messages themselves are no longer visible.

Now it's happening again. I've tried logging out and back in on my phone, but the conversation gets stuck in a continuous reconnecting/loading loop.

I'm concerned because I use ChatGPT for long-term projects and detailed conversations. Losing access to parts of the visible chat history is a serious problem, even if the AI can still recall some information.

Has anyone experienced something similar?

• Is this a known issue with ChatGPT Work or cross-device synchronization?
• Is there any way to recover messages that have disappeared from the visible conversation?
• Are there any reliable workarounds to prevent this from happening again?

I'd really appreciate any insights or experiences. Thanks!

I've really been frustrated by my experience with support. I have 3 accounts, Plus, Business, and Enterprise. I'm the accountant owner and admin for the Business and Enterprise accounts.

In my experience, the articles in the help center are of very little value, but that's not my gripe. My much larger issue is when you need more support all you get is a chatbot. Somehow, yes, it is actually superior to my own ChatGPT. However, when it can't solve the issue, it files a ticket and then that's where things enter the darkest of black boxes.

I've had a ticket filed for weeks. When I'm really lucky, I get one useless response each week, asking me a question I've already answered.

I don't know what to do. I'm so frustrated and my entire organization is suffering. Has anyone else found a way to get better service? Am I missing an escalation pathway?

Results grouped by problem, sorted by solve time (fastest first).

The problems

These problems are very challenging for human contestants. The higher the score, the harder one is to solve. Small models like Luna, Haiku are struggling with problems like 2271H2, which are around 200 points.

These problem are quite new from the September and October contents, so they are unlikely being trained.

Problem 2271G

Problem 2271H2

Problem 2273F

Problem 2261F2

Fastest Model per Problem

Observations

• Sol 6.1 achieved the fastest solve time on 3 out of 4 problems.
• Terra 6.1 Max was fastest on 2271H2, despite being a larger model at max reasoning, so lower TPS.
• On 2273F, Terra 6.1 High was 4m 10s faster than Terra 6.1 Max, but Max produced a better solution that is twice faster and twice less memory.
• On lower reasoning levels, Terra 6.1 refuses to solve problem quickly, if it can solve. This might be an annoyance to some, but might be a great feature since it doesn't waste your time and tokens, just being straight up honest:

Conclusion

Sol 6.1 remains the most intelligent model of the bunch. However, for problems that can be solved with lower models, it would be more costly. Using Sol 6.1 is like having a mathematician writing code: it really determines to prove your code work systematically, that might lead to overengineering. On the other hand, Terra 6.1 might be considered under-engineering. So, I suspect that with Sol creates a slightly overengineered plan and Terra implements slightly lazy, they could balance out their weaknesses.

OpenAI claims its models produced three major results: proofs resolving long-standing problems in harmonic analysis, a disproof of the Exponential Time Hypothesis, and existence proofs related to quantum field theories including QCD. The mathematics and computing work has been published and formalized in Lean, while independent experts are now reviewing the claims; the physics materials have yet to be released publicly. If even one result survives scrutiny, how much could AI change the way advanced mathematical research is conducted and verified?

I’m looking forward to replace our Amazon echo devices after Amazon ruined it with Alexa+ (it has an annoying teenage girls personality with lots of creepy slang that can’t be changed and keeps screwing up basic functions). I read about the upcoming OpenAI smart speaker over the summer, but there’s no news since then. Any word on progress on releasing this to market?

Do you think if we keep asking for faces, eventually it will start producing the same ones? or do you think some of the faces already matches someone out there in the world? dead or alive.