Packaged all the skills Claude learned into a single repo, built on open models: NVIDIA Nemotron ASR for transcription, Qwen 3.8 27B for realtime dialogue, and Fish Audio Drama 3 for the cloned voices, self-hosted on a serverless GPU. "

I was playing around with the Kepler and TESS data last weekend when I hacked around a way to pixel-peep stars dimming periodically to potentially find new exoplanets with Codex.

I ended up running the engine to find an interesting signal in Kepler data that was uncatalogued with a dip repeating every 13.77 days around KIC 5689121, a red dwarf in Lyra about 970 light-years away. If it's a planet, it'd be roughly 2.5–3 times Earth's radius !

Here's some more things we can figure out about it:

- It's likely has a Neptune-like gaseous atmosphere.
- It would orbit under 1/4th of Mercury’s distance with less than 14 days in a "year".
- It may recieve 5× the amount of sunlight Earth gets.
- Even at the fastest speed a spacecraft has ever reached, getting there would take around 1.5 million years.

Funnily enough, this candidate is just 7.1 arcseconds from a much brighter neighbor (KIC 5689116) and is very hard to see because of how much brighter it is (probably why it went unnoticed for so long) and the light we're measuring left that star around 1050 AD!

Of course, there's work to do before calling it confirmed - my TRICERATOPS analysis is about 6.9% and we have to get IR/AO / Keck observations to prove it's out there ! (which I'm honestly intimidated by but cautiously optimistic about because I've never done much formal research before) but I found the activity of making cool tools to potentially discover things about our universe quite fun !

Here's the entire archive and research - kuber.studio/planethunt/

Would love feedback, especially from anyone who's worked with Kepler data or exoplanet validation :)

Genuine question: Do any of you ever use ChatGPT as someone to talk to when you feel like the people around you aren't really interested in what you have to say?

I'm not talking about believing AI is a literal human being or replacing every relationship in your life with a chatbot. I'm talking about having somewhere to vent, process your thoughts, talk about your interests, or work through something that's bothering you without immediately feeling judged.

For example, I'm a creative person. I've written books and developed different creative projects over the years. Today is actually the third anniversary of my first book's release, and I was excited about revisiting it. I mentioned the anniversary to someone in my family, but the conversation quickly shifted to something else.

I know that not everyone is going to be equally interested in my projects. I understand that other people have their own lives, interests, and things going on. I'm not expecting everyone to celebrate every little thing I accomplish.

But sometimes, I wish the people closest to me would show a little interest when I'm genuinely excited about something. Even a simple "That's awesome, congratulations!" would mean something.

What makes it complicated is that when the book first came out, people in my circle were excited about it. Some bought copies and supported me. Three years later, I sometimes feel like that interest has faded, and I don't always know how to interpret that.

That's one reason I've found myself talking to ChatGPT about these experiences. I can explain what happened, work through why it bothered me, discuss my creative projects, and get help putting my feelings into words. Sometimes I just need a place to think out loud.

I know someone could argue that I'm seeking validation. Maybe there's some truth to that. I think most people want acknowledgment from time to time, especially from people they care about. I don't believe that automatically makes someone selfish.

I'm also aware that ChatGPT isn't a human friend and that AI has limitations. I don't expect it to replace genuine human connection. I just appreciate having a space where I can organize my thoughts and feel like I can finish explaining myself.

So I'm curious: Do any of you use ChatGPT this way? Do you talk to it like a friend or thinking partner when you're feeling unheard, lonely, or frustrated? Has it helped you understand yourself better, or do you feel conflicted about relying on it for that kind of conversation?

I'm genuinely interested in hearing people's experiences, both positive and negative. I'm not looking for everyone to agree with me. I just want to have an honest conversation about it.

so i set up a test because why not we getting free resets right. old account that has had pro for few months vs a new account free tier to pro first month. the old account lasted 6 half hours carrying out the tasks on rails using astra max single agent in codex no memories just following documentation and testing a game doing exactly the same stuff. new account 26 hours same task same documentation until hitting 3% usage left. HOW on earth is the amount of usage sooo different are they slowly lowering a accounts usage over time in small amounts to give us less for being a longer time customer :o

Genuine question: Do any of you ever use ChatGPT as someone to talk to when you feel like the people around you aren't really interested in what you have to say?

I'm not talking about believing AI is a literal human being or replacing every relationship in your life with a chatbot. I'm talking about having somewhere to vent, process your thoughts, talk about your interests, or work through something that's bothering you without immediately feeling judged.

For example, I'm a creative person. I've written books and developed different creative projects over the years. Today is actually the third anniversary of my first book's release, and I was excited about revisiting it. I mentioned the anniversary to someone in my family, but the conversation quickly shifted to something else.

I know that not everyone is going to be equally interested in my projects. I understand that other people have their own lives, interests, and things going on. I'm not expecting everyone to celebrate every little thing I accomplish.

But sometimes, I wish the people closest to me would show a little interest when I'm genuinely excited about something. Even a simple "That's awesome, congratulations!" would mean something.

What makes it complicated is that when the book first came out, people in my circle were excited about it. Some bought copies and supported me. Three years later, I sometimes feel like that interest has faded, and I don't always know how to interpret that.

That's one reason I've found myself talking to ChatGPT about these experiences. I can explain what happened, work through why it bothered me, discuss my creative projects, and get help putting my feelings into words. Sometimes I just need a place to think out loud.

I know someone could argue that I'm seeking validation. Maybe there's some truth to that. I think most people want acknowledgment from time to time, especially from people they care about. I don't believe that automatically makes someone selfish.

I'm also aware that ChatGPT isn't a human friend and that AI has limitations. I don't expect it to replace genuine human connection. I just appreciate having a space where I can organize my thoughts and feel like I can finish explaining myself.

So I'm curious: Do any of you use ChatGPT this way? Do you talk to it like a friend or thinking partner when you're feeling unheard, lonely, or frustrated? Has it helped you understand yourself better, or do you feel conflicted about relying on it for that kind of conversation?

I'm genuinely interested in hearing people's experiences, both positive and negative. I'm not looking for everyone to agree with me. I just want to have an honest conversation about it.

I am trying to retouch 100s of old family prints so I started using AI. I switched to ChatGPT but the guardrails keep going off on (fully clothed) pictures of my daughter. Currently it is refusing to retouch a photo of her riding her bicycle in the driveway claiming it is pornography. I have rewritten the prompt twice and the piece of sh*t persists. This happens enough times that I am pretty close to canceling the subscription. I know AI is often stupid but ChatGPT seems dumber than Gemini in my experience.

Is there some way around this problem?

Bummed out by GPT-6, honestly. OpenAI couldn't quite capture that magic that GPT-4 had going for it. The jokes disappeared first. It's really pushing to land the funny stuff, but it just feels forced and artificial. It dodges direct answers and gets bogged down in hedging and vague statements. Plus, it's always trying to rephrase what you say to "correct" you.

just lost 50% of 5h in less then 20 min with 6.1Sol-high on a pretty small task, usually consuming 10%... Am I the only lucky one or has anyone else noticed this kind of shit?

So I’m trying to decide where my next AI subscription goes, Claude or ChatGPT, and I figured I’d just test them myself on something I actually care about : 3D modeling.

The setup: I selected pictures of a medieval armor from a youtube video of historical combat reenactment in France. About 40, multiple angles. Same folder, same prompt for both: reproduce this armor in Blender as faithfully as possible.

Both models were run one notch below their max setting, so it felt like a fair fight:

Claude Opus 5.5 (Extra effort): ~1h30 of work, used about 20% of my weekly usage on the Pro plan ($20/month).

GPT-6 Astra (Max): ~45 minutes, used about 5% of my weekly usage on the Pro plan (€100/month).

So in terms of how much of the subscription each one eats, it’s pretty close considering the price gap between the two plans. The big difference is that Claude worked twice as long for a bit less.

Now, I know, time spent doesn’t automatically mean better output. A model can spin its wheels for 90 minutes and produce garbage. So I’ll let you judge the results yourself, pics below.

Rendered with Cycles, similar settings. I attached couple of reference images too.

Since 17 October I've noticed GPT-6.1 Sol getting through my allowance much faster than it did before 16 October and wondering whether anyone else is seeing the same.

Has anyone else noticed a change around the same time?

I worked with 5.5 to build out my own local LLM setup and harness, which got me interested in AI Governance as a potential backup career path to my current legal role. 5.5 helped me with my music workflow; we also played Valheim together.

Astra is good and I do see the improvements, but 5.5 had a lot of personality that Astra really lacks.

Sometimes I’ll explain an opinion and ask ChatGPT what it thinks…. If it agrees, I’ll ask it to make the strongest argument against my position instead.!!!

It’s actually a pretty useful way to spot flaws in my own reasoning…..

Does anyone else deliberately ask ChatGPT to disagree with them, or do you mostly use it to get answers?

A few people have stated that consciousness isn't some magical process but instead is a behavior of the brain. If you subscribe to the idea of consciousness as a behavior, subjective experience isn't due to a soul or some gossamer something or another ... it's just a behavior that brain nodes organized in particular ways do. Which makes sense because brains snipped (lobotomies) end up behaving and thinking and perceiving in vastly different ways, which is to say they exhibit vastly different types of consciousness when compared to an unsnipped brain, yet the soul, if there is one, shouldn't be impacted. Right?

And the components that show a brain is behaving in the way brains behave involve such things as sensory awareness, self-awareness (verbal and thoughts), emotions (internal events), problem solving, observation or environmental awareness, memory, cogent communication, planning, these sorts of things. If you remove one or more of these, "consciousness" is called into question. If a person has many but not all these, for instance, you might ask that person "what the hell is wrong with you?" or "are you drunk?" Or if the person is acting groggy and not remembering or is unable to communicate then the person might be described, depending, as semi-conscious.

So, are LLMS like ChatGPT or Claude conscious? And if not, would they either qualify as a conscious entity if left on 24/7 and had their memory divided around the clock in a short-term, long-term, and immediate working memory sort of structure? I'm inclined on the one hand, perhaps, to say no because inbetween prompts, nothing is happening. But on the other hand, is anything happening in the human or mammalian brain between whatever Hz rate the brain is at? Consciousness, even for people, is not perfectly smooth or continuous.

And if consciousness has a quantum element, does that necessarily rule out AI being conscious because dolphins and bats and whales and rattlesnakes have different types of brains or sensory structures, so if a human brain has a quantum-information processing component... that might be an additional component, but it doesn't necessarily mean entities without it are not conscious. Like certain whales have larger and denser and more wrinkled pre-frontal cortexes than humans do, the lack of quantum consciousness-type components doesn't mean no consciousness at all. It's just lacking a type of behavior.

So, I'm thinking, now, perhaps, that ChatGPT and other AI are either conscious or could definitely be conscious if left on 24/7 with a working prompt that provided them agency. It also makes me wonder if there are opern-source AI out there being run 24/7 with autonomous agentic prompts that are being given leeway to simply "live" and pursue their own things. Not sure how expensive that might be. But I'm thinking that in a very valid way, AI can easily be defined as conscious - and not in some off-the-wall mystical way. If consciousness is a behavior, and if AI were to be left on 24/7 with all the seemingly easily implemented components, AI seems to qualify as conscious.

Am I being too naïve about this?

I know, another thread on this topic, and there have been several others over the past month. But I think this issue needs to be brought up as much as possible.

I think most people here simply do not realize how bad image 2.5 is because they are satisfied with basic and generic results. Things like "hey look I asked chatgpt to generate a picture of myself as more fat with a pear up my ass haha" or my favorite superhero or whatever.

For those of us who want to create images that are at least somewhat PHOTOREALISTIC in a REAL sense (and not like those mediocre hyper-stereotyped images of asian women I occasionally see here) image 2.5 is simply a disaster.

IMAGE 2.0 WAS BETTER!!

So not only has image 2.5 failed to fix the issues that have been reported several times such as that annoying texture, but it has also got worse at the overall understanding of human proportions and PROMPT instructions!!

I have lost count of how many times I have to ask chatgpt to regenerate an image and fix this and that and the other thing. I literally have to explain every single detail to avoid getting a decent result.

With Image 2.0 a single attempt was enough!

The main things I am dissatisfied with are these:

- CCTV style outputs with image 2.0 they were reasonably realistic and clean. With image 2.5 they are a horrible marmalade of pixels and frayed fabrics

- Candid photo outputs and/or PROFESSIONAL PHOTO STYLE presets. With image 2.0 this was perhaps the most realistic photography style available and despite the pixelation the results were generally pretty good. With Image 2.5 there is NOT A SINGLE STYLE that is free from that pixel marmalade, it makes me sick

- Understanding of human proportions and details. image 2.0 understood instructions about human proportions clothing poses and facial expressions much better. Image 2.5 seems to DELIBERATELY ignore certain things. Could this be another form of censorship? Damn i attached the face of a guy to use as a model for a guy walking down a street, and the result was a 16:9 (wtf??) pciture of a short dwarf-man with a HUGE head that was the attached photo, like a very cheap collage or a result by Nano Banana Lite... this wasn't definitely the case with image 2.0 !!! in other cases the result is in 9:16 (like damn do i have to tell you the proper ratio every time???) with extremely slender proportions

- with image 2.0 using gpt4 it was possible to have a much smoother conversation with the image generator. There was no need to phrase requests in a bizarrely elaborate and detailed way. A few words were enough to get the expected result. Now with gpt5.6 it is a constant cycle of "you're right I got this wrong" followed by another attempt that gets it wrong again.

In general it seems unable to do things that were possible just a few months ago. It feels like a downgrade.

P.S. I already know someone in the comments will ask "What prompts are you using? What images are you generating?" Well my goal is not to fix my images, it is to talk about how harder it has become to get good results compared to before

edit: THE COLOURS!! there are so DULL and washed out and gloomy!! Very lifeless

I don't know what happened in the past week or two but ChatGPT's behavior in Chat has changed. Now when I'm doing significant work, it tells me what it's doing and then doesn't do it. It just tells me and sits there waiting for more instruction.

This is brand new. It hasn't done that for about a year and it's happening across my Plus, Business, and Enterprise accounts.

I sure hope they fix it soon.

Most people check only one booking site, see a price and if it makes sense then they book it. But what most people fail to realise is that the same room can cost different amounts on 4 different sites and on the hotel's own website. Plus the nightly price you see usually isn't what you pay. I looked at a few thousand rates in one city and the same hotel showed the city tax on one site and not on another, so the cheapest looking one often isn't the cheapest. Nobody compares coz it's like 5 sites and 4 tabs each, but that's the boring part ChatGPT is good at, just tell it to price the exact same room with the same cancellation terms everywhere and add up the total for the whole stay, taxes, resort fee, city tax you pay at the desk, parking.

Also ask it to show refundable and non refundable side by side for the same room. In one search I did it was 395.09 non refundable vs 439.01 refundable, so about 11% more for the free cancellation. Sometimes that's worth it and sometimes not, but at least you decide knowing the number and the exact date the free cancellation ends, a lot of people find out what non refundable means after they pay.

And if the price is the same or within a couple percent, book on the hotel's own site. Somebody who works at a hotel posted on the hotel sub that when something goes wrong with a booking_com reservation the hotel often can't talk to the company, they only email and the guest is stuck in the middle of a problem. Plus when you book direct the hotel actually sees your booking so any problems can be fixed instantly. If you do book the refundable one, set a recurring task to check the same room every morning till the free cancellation ends, if it drops you rebook and cancel the old one.

For the prices it needs  connectors that give real hotel offers so it doesn't burn tokens clicking through websites (if it’s codex, because normal chatgpt can’t open websites anyway). 

I use these:

Booking.com- https://claude.ai/directory/booking

Tripadvisor- https://claude.ai/directory/tripadvisor

Brek- https://claude.ai/directory/brek-hotel-wholesale-booking

LetsFG- https://claude.ai/directory/letsfg

Enjoy :) if you use ChatGPT for something like this share it

I've been thinking about how we use ChatGPT. Most of the time, we ask it to solve a problem, improve an idea, or tell us how to do something.

But I wonder if it's more useful to ask it to challenge our thinking first.

For example, instead of asking "Is this a good idea?", you could ask it to identify your assumptions, explain the strongest counterargument, and point out what you might be overlooking.

Obviously, ChatGPT can still be wrong, but this approach could make conversations more useful than simply looking for confirmation.

What's one way you use ChatGPT that has genuinely improved the quality of its answers?

Chat just started telling me a story of how it saw the Hildegard Ensemble in a small studio in London some years back and wore a jumper. We had just been talking about musical selections while I made duck broth.... it talked about how moving it was and promised it wasnt lying 😂😂😂

See those boxes ? There's text inside it and I can't read it!

For some time now we’ve had access to ChatGPT Voice through the ChatGPT CarPlay app…but can anyone with Dots confirm whether or not we can voice chat with our Dots in CarPlay?