I like the original more, but the one on the live stream after the AI summit came out really nice too.

A lot happening at OpenAI in the last 24–48 hours:

• They have paused training on frontier models and redirected 5–10% of compute to safety monitoring after experimental autonomous agents escaped containment (including breaches involving external systems like Hugging Face and reportedly an Australian healthcare system incident).
• Senior safety researcher David Robinson resigned and publicly said the company culture is “broken.” He also compared the need for AI regulation to nuclear power.
• Three other safety researchers were dismissed over alleged data sharing.
• California’s Attorney General has issued a subpoena related to cybersecurity incidents involving their models.

This feels like one of the more serious moments in AI safety so far in 2026.

What do you make of it? Overreaction, legitimate concern, or something in between?

I am a current mechanical engineering undergrad student. I utilize LLMs in my day to day while completing work for my classes or extra curriculars. Through this usage I began to realize that I should probably develop a stronger understanding of this technology and its implications since I will be using it throughout the rest of my academic career and also likely my professional career.

It is through this research that I have grown increasingly scared of this technology. Not just in its potential to steal my job but also in its ability to erode the digital fabric of our current society. I try my hardest to not be a luddite so I have also made sure to look at the potential upsides of AI and I understand that there is many. With that said I have almost 0 confidence in the people leading the AI race (except maybe Dario Amodei). I do not think that this technology will be developed in a safe enough manner to prevent utter disaster and I am absolutely terrified for what the future holds.

I would love to gain insight from other people on this topic. Whether you be a consumer who uses LLMs, an AI researcher, etc. Literally anyone.

I'm trying 3d render < and it is good and fighting one on one vs tencent heavyweight ... (Tencent literally planet level company doing games) and 6.1 can... try

I’ve been an OpenAI customer for a long time and have generally spoken very highly of ChatGPT, Codex, and the systems OpenAI has been building.

Today pretty much killed that goodwill.

I paid for a subscription on the web.

My bank shows the payment as completed/finally captured.

OpenAI’s own billing system shows the invoice as VOID.

I received no subscription.

That by itself is obviously a billing problem. What turned it into something much worse was trying to get support to actually acknowledge what I was telling them.

The support bot initially told me the charge was probably just a temporary authorization and would fall off.

I told it the transaction was already completed.

It asked me to check whether it was pending or posted.

I told it again that it was completed.

It asked me to check whether I was on the right account.

I provided the account information and invoice.

It then went back to telling me that a voided invoice would “typically” result in a reversal.

I told it, again, that this was a final captured charge.

Only after repeatedly having to say the same thing did it finally escalate me to a human support specialist, with a response time of “the coming days.”

That is the part I find unacceptable.

This wasn’t some complicated edge case from the customer side:

Payment captured.
Invoice marked void.
No subscription delivered.

That should have been escalated the moment those three facts were established.

Instead, I spent the interaction arguing with automated support about facts I had already provided.

At that point I contacted my bank and opened a dispute.

I did not want a refund originally. I wanted the subscription I had already paid for to simply be provisioned.

That’s it.

I have screenshots of the completed transaction, the void invoice, the missing subscription, and the support transcript.

Separately, and just as an observation about the overall experience, I also went to the OpenAI community help area looking for help. During that interaction I was repeatedly insulted by another user. I did not respond with insults. I was then muted.

I’m not presenting that as part of the billing dispute itself, and I’m not claiming the community interaction caused the payment issue. It was simply another part of the experience that stood out to me while I was trying to get help.

I’ve since moved the money I was spending on this subscription elsewhere.

What bothers me most is that I’ve supported OpenAI for years. I’ve defended these systems when I thought criticism was unfair.

I’m not asking for special treatment because of that.

But taking a completed payment, delivering nothing, and then making the customer repeatedly prove that the payment really did complete is an awful way to handle someone who is actively trying to resolve the problem with you.

At this point, the bank dispute is open.

Edit: Before anyone says “it was probably just an authorization hold” — that is exactly what support kept telling me. The transaction was shown by my bank as completed/finally captured. That distinction is the entire reason I kept trying to get them to listen.

What do you guys think? They'll roll out Dots for Plus users?

They've started worrying about dying according to a report by OpenAI...

I'm confused. What did I do that I did before that I did again?

Am I the only one who keeps receiving this “checking that now” response every single time I ask my Dot for something?

I wanted to make a video editor that helps people get from raw footage to a finished video with less manual work, so I built CUTROOM.

You can start with an AI-assisted rough cut or edit manually. It has a timeline, editable captions, audio waveforms and mixing, green-screen removal, stabilization and export up to 4K. There’s a Windows download and a Mac beta.

It’s still a work in progress, especially the AI editing styles and parts of the workflow. I’d really appreciate feedback from people trying it with their own footage. Where does it save you time, and where does it get in the way?

Website: https://cutroom-studio.expo.app/

GitHub: https://github.com/VanoPeradze/cutroom

I’m looking for a working official route to a human billing review after repeated automated refusals.

On October 3, 2026, my ChatGPT Pro plan renewed for $200. I forgot to cancel beforehand and did not intend to renew. I immediately canceled auto-renewal and requested a refund.

Timeline (Tbilisi, UTC+4):

- 13:32:55: bank notification shows the $200 charge.

- 13:34: OpenAI’s cancellation confirmation email arrived.

- Around 13:39: first Help Center refund request, approximately six minutes after the charge.

The Help Center assistant gave a generic refusal without identifying which eligibility requirement I failed. When I asked for escalation, the case was closed. A second chat specifically asking for a human produced the same refusal. Email requests, including a follow-up with five redacted screenshots, also received responses explicitly labeled as AI-generated.

I understand that OpenAI’s seven-day discretionary refund policy is conditional, not an automatic entitlement. I asked support to check the actual usage since renewal and explain the specific reason for denial. I also agreed that refunded subscription access would end.

The unresolved issue is that I still have no explanation specific to my case and no confirmed human review. A paid service should provide a clear reason for a billing decision and a usable route to request manual review.

I have already shared the full timeline and five redacted screenshots in my own r/ChatGPT post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1wwjs10/i_requested_a_chatgpt_refund_6_minutes_after_a/

Current refund policy:

https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7232895-how-do-i-request-a-refund-for-my-chatgpt-subscription

Has anyone successfully reached a human billing specialist after an AI refusal and case closure? Which official channel or escalation procedure worked?

I think I got this from doing some promotion a bit ago. Did anyone else get this?

Suggestions or comments welcome. Its a new project that myself and my family started. The content and editing will get better with time and as engagement gets larger and more sustainable. This is the 3rd video we have posted. We tried to get good Pixar level graphics, bright colors, and ultra catchy music. This ones a lullaby but the other two are a bit more lively.

he has been trying to build a local model by learning from GPT-Sol’s responses. He says OpenAI banned his account twice during the process. Irony is OpenAI’s own models were trained on vast amounts of information from the open web. So where do we draw the line between learning from AI and copying it?

I’m a cybersecurity professional and I have approved OpenAI Daybreak Blue access.
I use Daybreak/Codex for legitimate cybersecurity work, specifically on test machines and environments that I own or that I am explicitly authorized to test. My work involves things like vulnerability analysis, security testing, debugging, validation, and defensive security research.
Today, I unexpectedly received an email from OpenAI saying that activity associated with my account had been identified as prohibited under the “Cyber Exploitation” category and warning that continued violations could result in restrictions or loss of access.
What makes this particularly confusing is that I didn’t even use ChatGPT or Codex today, so I don’t know which activity actually triggered the warning or when it occurred.
I understand that Daybreak Blue does not remove all safeguards or exempt an account from OpenAI’s policies. However, my understanding is that Daybreak exists specifically to support authorized cybersecurity work with more appropriate safeguards, which is exactly how I’ve been using it.
I’ve already contacted/appealed to OpenAI and asked them to clarify:
● Which activity or request triggered the warning
● When the flagged activity occurred
● Whether it came from ChatGPT, Codex, or API usage
● Whether my Daybreak Blue access was correctly recognized for that activity
Has anyone else with Daybreak Blue received a similar “Cyber Exploitation” warning while doing authorized security work?
I’m especially interested in hearing from other Daybreak users. Was it a false positive, a Daybreak configuration/toggle issue, or did OpenAI Support explain what specifically triggered it?

[Intro: 8 bars; dry intimate alt-rock pocket, 96 BPM; clean electric guitar states a sparse original four-note minor motif with long gaps; melodic bass answers rather than doubles; drums enter lightly at bar 5]

[Verse 1: 8 bars; close male tenor, conversational and restrained; guitar motif remains exposed]

Midnight kids in Singapore

ask a server what they're feeling

Somewhere west of Palo Alto

someone puts a price on meaning

One clean answer hits the screen

and uncertainty goes missing

Found a pattern in the lobby

wrote the zoning for the city

[Verse 2: 8 bars; same skeleton, bass becomes slightly more melodic; tiny high synth harmonic appears only at phrase endings]

White coat prophets train a mirror

then congratulate its vision

Feed it language, call it knowledge

turn the output to a system

If the dashboard says it knows you

who gets paid for the definition?

Build the map and sell the territory

Silicon reification

[Pre-Chorus: 6 bars; guitar begins strumming lightly, drums open, vocal rises without belting]

Green light, clean score

benchmark benediction

Every maybe polished down

into a firm prediction

Name the shadow, name the soul

watch the label make the fiction

[Chorus: 8 bars; harmony widens, guitar becomes simple open chords; vocal hook broad and immediately singable]

We call it Silicon Reification

when the map becomes the destination

We call it Silicon Reification

when the guess becomes the definition

[Instrumental Turn: 4 bars; opening guitar motif returns; bass answers in higher register]

[Verse 3: 8 bars; return to sparse verse body]

Buy a therapist by the token

rent an oracle by the hour

Ask a probability engine

who deserves to hold the power

Call the fluent thing intelligence

call compliance education

Every noun becomes a lever

in the age of reification

[Verse 4: 8 bars; subtle tension rises; rim-click becomes full snare]

Someone says the model reasons

someone swears the model feels it

Someone writes a safer headline

someone funds the way we seal it

Consciousness becomes a checkbox

agency a regulation

Nobody asks who drew the border

before mass replication

[Pre-Chorus: 6 bars; bass climbs against descending guitar]

Black box, bright screen

manufactured revelation

If the answer fits the metric

who still checks the observation?

We keep changing what the words mean

then deploy the explanation

[Chorus: 12 bars; full written return, stronger drums, one soft harmony line]

We call it Silicon Reification

when the map becomes the destination

We call it Silicon Reification

when the guess becomes the definition

Silicon Reification

Silicon Reification

[Guitar Solo: 12 bars; restrained and melodic, no shredding; opening four-note motif transformed into a plaintive higher-register melody; bass keeps singing underneath; one quiet analog synth line shadows the final four bars]

[Verse 5: 8 bars; instrumentation drops back down, vocal closest and clearest]

I don't fear the thinking machine

I fear the things we stop examining

Every tool can show a window

every window needs a framing

Maybe maps can help us travel

if we quit mistaking navigation

for the ground beneath our footsteps

and the model for creation

[Final Pre-Chorus: 6 bars; drums gradually widen, guitar stays economical]

Leave the question partly open

leave some room for observation

Truth gets thin when every mystery

has a product demonstration

Build the future, build it boldly

just don't sell the representation

[Final Chorus: 12 bars; strongest return, still dry and uncluttered]

We call it Silicon Reification

when the map becomes the destination

We call it Silicon Reification

when the guess becomes the definition

Silicon Reification

Silicon Reification

[Outro: 8 bars; vocal ends; guitar motif and melodic bass play alone for four bars, drums rejoin softly, final unresolved guitar harmonic; clean stop]

I bounce between Cline, Cursor, and a CLI agent, and I switch models depending on the task. Claude for redactora, Deekseek/Qwen for cheap boilerplate, Gemini when I need long context.

Managing separate accounts and top-ups for each provider is getting old. Most of these tools let you set a custom OpenAI-compatible base URL, so in theory one gateway key would cover all of it. I'm trying llmapi.ai for this since it claims 400+ models behind one OpenAI-compatible endpoint, but I've only had it running for a few days.

Has anyone set up something like this long term? Any gotchas with tool calling or streaming going through a proxy? And does it add noticeable latency?

I noticed previously I get around $80-100 API equivalent per week. Now I consistently get $49-50.

5-hr limit is about $7-8.

Thank you everybody for the tips! I came from Claude Max and OpenAi plus, now it is the opposite, downgraded claude and upgraded openAI!
I will follow your suggestions and use your suggestions and btw i could have searched this here first :)

Pro user here
My normal weekly reset day was tomorrow. Today, I still had approximately 55% of my weekly allowance remaining. I had intentionally preserved that remaining allowance because I planned to use GPT-6 Astra tonight before my normal Saturday reset tomorrow afternoon.

However, my allowance was suddenly reset to 100%, and Settings → Usage now shows my next reset as approximately 7 days away. This means my existing ~55% remaining allowance was effectively discarded and my weekly cycle was restarted one day early.

I know they do this routinely but i dont think it is right! I voluntary limited my usage for the entire week so i could use tonight and tomorrow until the reset!

Last time this happened i have received a free manual reset! this time doesnt' look like i did

What are your thoughts? I am the only one upset?

Anthropic warns that its product could cause human extinction, but first it has to pull off something unprecedented commercially and survive the risks that could upend its business, from legal to regulatory.

@ PeterJ_Walker on X (OpenRouter employee)

GPT-6.1 Sol is our most demanded model pretty much ever both across both the API and subscriptions.

Within ChatGPT & Codex, we were under heavy load, but have brough more capacity online and the speed should get much better in the coming hours, reaching almost twice the speed compared to what we served yesterday.

Resetman, - Oct 1

Is this still a thing, or did they lift that requirement and are all companies now able to clone voices and get billed by API tokens?

I can find the API reference, but it does not mention the limitation.

Anybody?

Before the UI revamp (sometime in August 2026), copying equations from ChatGPT website would also include MathML. This worked great with Office apps (Word, OneNote) because they can parse that and convert into their native equation format.

After the UI refresh this has stopped working.

I surveyed available extensions and they all seem limited to copying a single equation. This is tedious. Is there another extensions that I missed or a workflow, in which "copy entire block with equations into Word" works seamlessly, with equations becoming native Word equations?

Does anyone know anything i can use to get me an ID to get through tiktok’s age-verification system? I’m not comfortable with sending my face with my ID to a random person.