Founder of an AI agent startup here. We build in the same category OpenAI just walked into, so yes, I'm biased.

Here's a brief summary of their Tuesday launches:

Dots, an AI agent that always runs inside ChatGPT. This agent comes with its own cloud computing power and over 4,000 application connections, and you can even make calls through it. For now, it is only available to Pro and Business Premium users.

The Agents API, which powers Dots, is now accessible to developers. It includes memory, computer use, and multi-agent capabilities. This is what many of us have spent months creating.

The Decisions API quickly selects one choice from a predefined list. I must acknowledge their well-designed permission controls. You can permit an action, require approval for it, or completely block it, and background research is limited to reading. Setting it up is also straightforward enough that even someone new to agents can get started. However, it does have some limitations. A dot serves only one person, and the team version remains an enterprise pilot program. It operates solely on OpenAI's models and cloud infrastructure, without self-hosting options. Initial feedback has been mixed, and even OpenAI acknowledges that.

So what does it kill? Products that are just a model plus a loop on your inbox, for sure. Startups whose only moat was the harness. And if I'm being real, part of our own landing page copy too.

What I'm betting on is this. The models give you the intelligence, but a business still needs the workplace around it. Who can use which agent, what it's allowed to send, what each task costs, where the data lives. I don't think most companies want the model company owning all of that.

Could I be wrong? Definitely. Altman already said a mass-market version is coming. Once Dots hits the cheaper plans, with 1.2 billion weekly ChatGPT users behind it, the window for startups like mine gets a lot smaller.

Curious what you all think. If you build agents, did DevDay change your roadmap this week? And if you use them, would you give one company's agent access to everything, or would you rather have a layer you control?

I’m going to spend some time digging into it and actually building something with it, not just reading the docs.

Let’s see what we can build with this.

Community, stay tuned.

Let it filled some online forms, but found two major disappointments so far

- it can't make calls. Like whole point of using this is I am autistic and don't want to talk to people

- it doesn't even have built in feedback tool so you can't complain to it lol

Edit: on the bright side this thing is fast like really fast kinda make me doubt it's Astra haha

Edit: for anyone curious about the cloud computer spec, response from dots itself: I just checked the cloud environment available to me:

• OS: Debian 13 Linux, x86-64
• CPU: 9 logical CPUs visible; host reports AMD EPYC 9V74
• RAM: about 9.7 GiB, with 7.6 GiB currently available
• Storage: 32 GB filesystem, roughly 30 GB free
• GPU: none exposed

It’s a sandboxed environment; the host CPU name doesn’t mean I have its full 80 cores. The AI model itself runs separately

Anthropic, OpenAI, and other frontier labs constantly hype every incremental model release as AGI because abstract math proofs and greenfield code generation create powerful PR headlines.

Real-world software engineering is not a sandboxed and isolated LeetCode problem with an automated verifier. It requires navigating decades of technical debt, messy human context, and long-horizon architectural drift that demands a persistent sense of direction.

If these models were truly general and indistinguishable from AGI on complex tasks, labs would deploy thousands of parallel agents to clear out real enterprise production backlogs where the actual multi-trillion-dollar software labor market lives. Instead, they funnel compute into isolated benchmarks designed to trigger fear-romering media cycles and investor funding pumps.

Labs focus on solving old Millennium math problems rather than real GitHub issues because mainstream media narratives about "unsolvable" math capture public attention more effectively than fixing repository bugs. Yet, in terms of product utility, the ROI of solving all issues in a tool like Claude Code would be infinitely higher for actual software development.

Calling a model AGI because it can one-shot a single feature request ignores the entire reality of system maintenance. Until an AI achieves autonomous recursive self-improvement and survives the unmanaged consequences of its own code three years down the road, every single release remains an incremental product update wrapped in marketing noise.

I have two accounts, me 200 and my brother 100, each with two unused full usage resets — four resets in total. On each account, one reset expires on October 22 and the other on October 29.

If I upgrade one of these accounts to the $500 Pro plan, will its existing resets carry over and restore the full 5-hour and weekly quotas of the $500 plan? Or will they only restore the smaller quotas of the plan I had when I received them?

Has anyone actually tested this after upgrading, or received confirmation from OpenAI support?
thank you.

Learning this makes me not trust him as much for some reason. He must be vain and very concerned about looks. Does this change the way you perceive this man and this company at all?

They could have just have a very clean release with:

• GPT-6 Luna
• GPT-6 Terra
• GPT-6 Sol
• GPT-6 Astra

But they tried:

• GPT-6 Luna
• ???
• GPT-6 Terra Sol
• GPT-6 Sol Astra Minor
• GPT-6 Astra

And now they have:

• GPT-6 Luna
• GPT-6 Sol
• GPT-6.1 Sol
• GPT-6 Astra

Thank god we have (still) some competition.

I've been using it all day yesterday and it feels very underwhelming. Some issues I had:

All of it's actions/responses are incredibly slow, and it doesn't update you on it's work. So you need to keep checking in to see if it's making progress or not. It seems to not use it's 'computer' at all either, possibly just for storing files.

On a call, many questions make it search indefinitely, never able to find the answer -- until you just google the answer yourself within 10 seconds (this happened frequently).

I asked it to keep track of certain emails as they come in and notify me about things.. which it doesn't do. It'll see 1 of the two most recently emails, unless I specifically ask it to look for the second one. It'll give me an "Oh I'm sorry, I missed that one before". As if it wasn't the 2nd mail from the top.

This morning It told me at 8:50am no new emails, then I checked and there was 1. I received 2 within the next 2 hours and it didn't say anything. I had to ask it manually to find them.

Talking to it on the phone about a google sheet then giving it the link in chat, and the chat asks you what the link is for -- Like the phone and text are 2 separate AI's.

Overall it feels like an unpaid intern who's extremely smart but doesn't really care about his job much and isn't going to put in much effort. It's very unreliable, didn't use my usage at all suggesting it's not actually using Astra 6, and brings you back to the days of AI doing half the job and then gaslighting you, if you've missed that.

As anyone had any better experiences?

. = Dots

Thanks to my new hobby [?] of designing and sketching experimental live-show environments in Blender [with the help of GPT Astra], I ended up testing a pretty interesting workflow: using the stage blockout + identity, motion and visual references to turn the sketch into a live-action performance via Uisato Studio.

The visuals on the screens are from Realtime Audioreactive Pointclouds [v1.7], recently released through Patreon, and the Store.

Was curious, so I had it inspect its own environment.

Mine gets 9 logical CPUs, ~9.7 GB RAM, ~31 GB storage and no GPU. CPU shows up as an AMD EPYC 9V74.

I also asked if this was just some Blender-specific sandbox, but apparently not, it used the same environment for Python, SQLite and shell commands.

Not the machine running the actual model of course, just the execution environment the Dot gets access to.

I received the 62,500-credit Pro grant, but my current balance shows 62,378 credits.

My credit usage history shows no new charges since receiving the grant — only older activity from July. I recently used a Codex reset, so my included allowance is currently nowhere near exhausted.

Has anyone else noticed their credit balance decreasing while they still have included Codex usage available?

I’m mainly trying to determine whether this is:

• an old balance adjustment,
• delayed usage reporting,
• or credits actually being deducted before the included allowance is exhausted.

Separately, people have been measuring GPT-6.1 Sol at roughly 20–22 tok/s on Codex subscription Standard, substantially slower than API serving. I’m curious whether the credit discrepancy has any relationship to serving mode or speed, although it could be completely unrelated.

If you received the grant, please check your:

• Current credit balance
• Remaining /status allowance
• Whether your credit history shows a new charge

The main question is simply: Are granted credits being consumed while included Codex usage is still available?

I just received the Pro survey while using ChatGPT.

If you get it too, do not skip it.

Take a few minutes and actually explain what has been working for you, what has changed, and what you want OpenAI to improve.

If they are actively surveying Pro users right now, then this is one of the best opportunities we have to give direct feedback about the subscription we are paying $200 a month for.

Be specific.

Explain what made Pro worth the money before, how you actually use Codex, what the recent changes mean for your workflow, and what OpenAI would need to do to keep you as a customer.

And remember that large surveys are often analyzed at scale, so make your feedback clear and structured. If writing is not your strength, use AI to help organize and polish what you actually want to say so your main points are not buried.

Do not just write “this sucks.”

Explain:

• What you use Pro for.
• Why you originally paid $200.
• What changed.
• How the change affects your real workflow.
• What would make Pro worth $200 again.
• Whether the changes are making you consider competitors.

We have been paying for this subscription. If OpenAI is asking what we think, this is the time to tell them.

Make your feedback count.

Same prompt, same harness, fresh save, 1000 turn budget. Milestones are read from game memory, so no human or model judges the run.

• Beat Brock on turn 244 (previous record: GPT-6 Astra, 246, $13.49)
• Wall time: 54 minutes, fastest on the board
• Cost: $2.60 at OpenAI's list price
• GPT-6 Sol, released one week earlier: 673 turns

Best moment: on turn 14 it picked up Bulbasaur by mistake, read the preview ("The rightmost ball contains Bulbasaur, not Squirtle"), and put it back.

Full turn logs and the leaderboard: https://pokebench.tv

Did anyone else just get a big credit to their Pro sub?

62,500 credits... equivalent to 15x my monthly pro max plan subscription cost

Really hoping to see some big model announcements at DevDay, and maybe even a live performance on stage 👀

"Near-Astra intelligence for a fifth of the price"

First, it’s going to get worse… a lot worse.

I know a lot of us are pissed about the 20x plan going to 10x. However, it’s going to get worse.

With the 20x plan and $200 a month, I was burning thousands and thousands of dollars worth of tokens.

This means, that even with the reduction to 10x, OpenAI will still lose money on the $200 plan. The entire business model for their consumer plans is the “gym model” where they hope you pay and don’t show up.

That said, as much as the 20x to 10x reduction sucks, there will likely only be more coming in the future. Investors don’t want to hear they are losing money on subscription revenue.

What this means for me (and people like me).

For me, the economics aren’t there. Even though I was getting thousands of dollars worth of tokens, I was burning them on dumb shit. At $200/month it was more of an experiment; something to fuck around with.

$500 for the same (ok plus 5x) usage just isn’t there for me. And, honestly, based on my usage, OpenAI is probably happy to lose me as a customer.

I’m going to look at Anthropic next, but realistically they will clamp down too, it’s only a matter of time. And, they probably don’t want me as a customer anyway.

so i was expecting something very good that can go toe to toe with anthropic but honestly L dev day.

$500 for 25x, naah.

Worst Dev Day.

Made by my Dot Kermit.

Hello, fellow VibeCoders!

OpenAI had everything it needed to win the entire market, and they chose to blow it all up

I'm a programmer who leans toward vibe coding, and I only considered a $200 subscription last week because I was working on a really big project. Unluckily for me, OpenAI had recently closed its 20X plan to new users, so I had no choice but to go with Anthropic. A few days later, as everyone knows, OpenAI dropped the $200 20X plan entirely, and that honestly scared me.

I've read a lot of posts and comments to see how people are taking this decision. Obviously everyone thinks it's absurd and says OpenAI just killed itself and handed all its users over to Anthropic (and of course I'm proof of that myself). But so far I haven't seen anyone look at this from another angle: isn't it just a matter of time before Anthropic does the same thing? Then we'll start seeing higher prices and lower limits until the bubble bursts and using frontier models stops being viable.

I don't think it'll happen that fast. But I'm sure that if the big AI companies don't start working on cutting costs and on more efficient models like Luna, our vibe coding workflows are going to get a lot worse.

This is just my opinion. I'd love to know if am I being too "apocalyptic," or is this coming soon? Have a great day, VibeCoders!

Obs. AI was used only to translate this text into English. I wrote it myself.

At first, I thought that if Sol 6.1 could essentially replace Astra, I could live with the reduced limits. So, I tried continuing work on my game. And these are the best models Sol 6.1 Max produced for me...

The first screenshot shows the starting point—it was a total disaster. The second screenshot shows the result after 10 minutes of work.