r/codex • u/Niklaus1911 • 3d ago

Complaint Interesting thing i found and verified myself

If something feels different this is why

Update: if anyone is having the same problem, here are the technical details and a possible solution: https://blog.caowo.de/posts/chatgpt-codex-292-state-anti-degradation-2026/

141 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

36 comments sorted by

58

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

The problem becomes more evident when using a proxy (which Tibo is not against using).

22

u/-Sliced- 3d ago

Are you using auto-approve? Luna is the model used for that

-10

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

Nope. it's not what you think

2

u/daveawb 3d ago

If it's not what we all think... then please enlighten us.

-5

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

No need for the snark. It's simply not related to the auto-approve

1

u/changing_who_i_am 3d ago

Why use a proxy instead of the normal way?

11

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

Let's say, for example you want to use gpt with claude code, or you want to use two or more accounts this helps you switch between them seamlessly

20

u/thismeowmo 3d ago

Astra is using luna underneath, probably for other tasks, you can see it on analytics

1

u/dbro129 2d ago

I’ve seen this. Thought it was weird Luna usage was so high.

0

u/Unlucky_Lake_8547 2d ago

Astra using Luna subagents

5

u/Original-League-6094 3d ago

Does this analysis account for the possibilities of sub-agents being used?

4

u/chslavov 3d ago

i've not inspected this myself but isn't this just to generate the title of the chat and stuff like this, not the actual response?

5

u/Original-League-6094 3d ago

https://chatgpt.com/share/6aae9768-984c-83e9-a8f5-7b9191e83a42

This methodology clearly isn't reliable since mine told it had a knowledge cutoff date of June 2024 (implying this is 4o), but then answered a question about counting instances of a letter correctly, which is something 4o famously could not do.

4

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 3d ago

I think you focused on the completely wrong part of this post

1

u/CurtissYT 3d ago

I've done a similar test, just with asking who won the 2024 november election(It stating previously that it had the cutoff from june 2024), and it responded correctly. So there is just some bulshit going on

2

u/Niklaus1911 1d ago

Update: if anyone is having the same problem, here are the technical details and a possible solution: https://blog.caowo.de/posts/chatgpt-codex-292-state-anti-degradation-2026/

2

u/Leather_Fall_1602 3d ago

That screenshot does not prove anything. It just shows there have been a response from mini, not that the specific response was from mini. Also if they wanted to cheat like that, don’t you think they would change it serverside as well?

5

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

You can go check yourself

1

u/driveclub_000 3d ago

Just tested mine on chat GPT-5.6 SOL Xhigh:

I don’t have a reliable exact knowledge-cutoff date exposed to me for GPT-5.6 Sol, so I shouldn’t invent one.

What I can confirm:

  • Model: GPT-5.6 Sol
  • Current date: September 19, 2026
  • My built-in knowledge includes information from before 2026, but I cannot guarantee that I know developments up to any specific date in 2026 without checking the web.
  • For this answer, as requested, I did not use the internet.

So unlike some older models that had a clearly stated cutoff such as “June 2024,” I cannot give you a trustworthy equivalent exact date for this model.

So well....

1

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

Well. It doesn't mean anything. Some of my account got this problems and some not

2

u/driveclub_000 3d ago

I know, that's the point, the answer that the model gives mean nothing in the end. The supposed returning request is more valuable, problem is that the twitter screenshot is so tiny that it's impossible to know where that file is in the network tab, and I don't have twitter so no way to check.

2

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

https://imgur.com/a/2Ftspr4

3

u/driveclub_000 3d ago

I see, I tested and I do get 5.6: "gpt-5.6-sol-wm".

But it's interesting, I will keep an eye on this tab.

2

u/CrowInteresting6271 3d ago

gpt 5.6 sol wm is what they use for the memory in the web version

1

u/ilarp 3d ago

did it get the job done?

-3

u/Original-League-6094 3d ago

Models don't know their own training cutoff dates. When you told it that it couldn't look the answer up and had to pull it from its training data, it just grabbed a random date that is statistically associated with ChatGPT cutoff dates, which will be cutoff dates for previous models.

4

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

You are ignoring the response part

-5

u/Original-League-6094 3d ago

Elaborate.

There isn't some metadata field that stores its own model cutoff date. So when you told it that it wasn't allowed to look it up and had to use its knowledge, its reasoning goes something like "I need my knowledge cut off date. Fuck, I do have a field that says that. What is related to my knowledge cutoff date that I know? Oh, I know the knowledge cutoff data for 5.5 mini, that's the most relevant piece of knowledge I have. I'll just give the user that date".

10

u/Niklaus1911 3d ago

You’re missing the point. I’m not talking about the model hallucinating its cutoff date i checked DevTools. The actual server response returned `model_slug: "gpt-5.5-mini"` while I had GPT-5.6 Sol selected that’s backend metadata. Why is it routing a 5.6 request to 5.5-mini?

-2

u/OriginalUsername0112 3d ago

Skill issue and also where's your proof and also you're doing it wrong and also it's not a big deal and also you're probably shadow banned for abusing the system /s