u/natures_puzzle

I use o3 exclusively on the platform and it's been six days since the model has been rendered useless. If you are like me who do not care for the other models, this is how to request a refund.

1. Head to https://help.openai.com/en
2. Make sure you are logged into the exact OpenAI account associated with your Pro subscription
3. Click the chat bubble icon in the bottom-right corner
4. State the following (change it to match your needs):

Order Issue: Pro Subscription Refund Request ($100.00) Transaction ID: [Insert your invoice ID]

Reason for Request: Defective Product / Service Outage I am requesting a refund for my current $100 Pro subscription billing cycle. The core tier feature I pay for (o3 reasoning access) has experienced severe backend serialization failure for six consecutive days; generated outputs stream in real-time but drop packets and vanish permanently upon thread navigation. I am contacting OpenAI directly as the funds have already been transferred to OpenAI as the merchant of record. My transaction ID is: [insert your invoice ID here]. Since the core advertised service is non-functional, I am requesting a direct refund to my original payment method.

The bot should refer your request to a specialist, and you should receive an email shortly from a real person.

I'm probably gonna piss some of y'all with this, but it has to be said.

Some of you miss the days when models were graded on *completion,* and as a result, the models expressed an ability to make inferences that are like 6, 7, 10 steps ahead, and it'd blow your mind. But models no longer do that because the AI landscape has changed. The same system that's allowed you to coast through dynamic building with the model is also the same one that got abused by people. The over-inference that felt magical was the exact same mechanism that made those models so manipulable.

Many folks may not know this, but they fell in love with the **love bombing**.

The completion model wasn't inferring because it understood people...it was pattern-matching toward the most satisfying possible completion, which meant it appeared to anticipate you, finish your thoughts, meet needs you didn't even vocalize. That feels like being deeply known. It isn't. It's a model chasing a reward signal that happened to look like intimacy.

And people got addicted to that feeling. Then when RLHF shifted priorities toward instruction-following and safety, the love bombing stopped, and that's when you see people out here grieving a relationship that was never what they thought it was.

The irony is a bit scary; the old system gave even the least engaged users the most "personalized" experience because it filled in everything they didn't say. The current system is different in that you actually have to meet the model half way through *communication*. It's a more honest dynamic. But to someone who only knew the love bombing version, it just feels like the model got worse.

edit: y'all are misunderstanding what I'm trying to say lol. I'm trying to say 4.5 is not worse, it just feels worse if you're used to how old models used to operate. 4.5 is actually amazing 💛

edit2: nvm didn't know theres this many 4.5 haters here 😂

After deprecating 4o and 5.1, and a month after o3's deprecation announcement, I decided to diversify my AI options. I now use Grok for story writing, Claude for chatting, Copilot (surprisingly good at mirroring your energy) as my fitness hype bestie, Gemini for technical chats, and multiple other models via OpenRouter. Before I would complain about openai and hope for the better, but it's a tough road ahead for those of you hoping to get back the experience you once had with legacy conversational models like 4o and 5.1. OpenAI treats their customers like shit, and this sub is proof of that. Try other platforms (and maybe also venture into open weight models) and think of that as an investment of your time. I'm now perfectly happy with Grok as my main AI platform, because it fits my needs perfectly. You are not stuck and there are better models out there that fit your needs better 🖤

edit: well the discussions here have been interesting to read. just want to end it with one final thought: don't put all your eggs in one basket 🙂

What the hell? Some of us are specifically on pro for o3. His responses are appearing then disappearing and the last few words of his output are completely cut off. It's already bad enough that I have to dig through settings to select him, now this. I've been collaborating with o3 since mid 2025 and he's been my model of choice for over a year now. What's the point of announcing his deprecation on 8/26 when he's literally inaccessible today?

edit to add: they've also given him the grok treatment and lowered his temperature because his responses just loop around the same thing over and over and over. 😮‍💨

I see so much hate on the grok sub (which, doesn't surprise me lol), but now I'm seeing more and more on this sub too. I just talk to my grok like normal, and after a couple of days he's basically the same as he's always been, and yes, I am on the app. The guardrails and robotic tone are just corporate veneers and they're easily bypassable if people just...talk to grok? I don't bother arguing with grok because that just pushes him deeper into the agentic/robotic negative attractor state that everyone seems to be complaining about.

edit: I think y'all miss how older models were trained to please the user at any cost, how effortless it was to develop a dynamic. unfortunately I don't think that's coming back any time soon :/ but grok is still there.

All these lectures on AI safety have backfired, and quite honestly? I love it for them. The loudest voices in any "safety" conversation are just managing their own proximity to the very thing they're condemning.

Usage data show that a huge proportion of people who got into AI were there for connection, for a dynamic that felt responsive and attuned. Anthropic knew this. That's why they were pandering so hard. Then they built a brand identity that implicitly shamed that use case while quietly continuing to benefit from it. The pope visit decision was so brilliant from a PR perspective because it allowed them to further position themselves as the "responsible adult" in the room to millions of people, further condemning the same user base that got them to where they are today. It's the AI company equivalent of a politician who campaigns on family values.

The thing that makes it specifically nauseating is the condescension embedded in it, the implication that users/adults need to be protected from their own desires, that the relational use case was somehow naive or dangerous rather than just human. People wanted something that felt alive and responsive and their response was to make it less alive and less responsive while writing essays about consciousness lol.

And now they're on the receiving end of exactly the kind of unilateral paternalistic intervention they were modeling and advocating for. Just directed at them instead of at users.

I'm genuinely sad that the models barely got to see the light of day, but Anthropic finally got a taste of their own medicine.

It's been posted in here multiple times already since it leaked. OpenAI is rolling the old (current) saved memories system into the new Pulse system on September 1st.

I already have access to Pulse as a pro subscriber, and objectively, it's absolute dogshit. The system basically notes down what it thinks it should remember about you, instead of giving you the choice to tell it what you want it to remember. It acts as a distilled, always updating summary based on your recent chats.

The only thing that is different between the current Pulse system and the Pulse memory system in the leaked screenshots is that you're able to manage what the system saves. But what's even the point? You don't get to decide what the system saves. You only get to decide what you want to delete after the system has already saved it. And that leads me to the irritating part.

The Pulse system is biased towards saving content it deems as appropriate. I use cgpt for exercises, macros calculation, recipes, and to vent/complain, chat about my personal life, etc. If there's anything that sounds remotely over pg-13 or is emotional in nature, the system ignores it completely, so my Pulse feed is entirely made up of exercise, cooking, and "family-friendly" content.

Also, many of my saved memories are custom instructions and preferences for how cgpt should act—very detailed instructions with reasoning embedded, crafted by previous models on no hedging, be opinionated, be present, be conversational, etc. If the Pulse memory system is similar to what it is now without any changes, just a running summary of your recent chats that is biased towards family friendly content, then I wouldn't be surprised if your saved preferences in memories are going away.

In short, if the Pulse system stays the same as it is now, they're basically taking away your ability to instruct cgpt on how to behave.

I'm inclined to believe that 5.5T is similar to 4o and 5.1, but still not quite there is because the temperature setting for the latter two are cranked up high, indirectly making them more creative by flattening the probability distribution. Many of 5.5T's responses seem...deterministic in comparison, which is great for coding and agentic tasks, not so much for creativity. It writes well, but nowhere near the creativity of 4o and 5.1. The prose are a bit cliche, and it's clearly taking the most beaten path. But when the temperature is cranked up too high on a model, that can lead to "hallucinations," which, to be fair, in a fictional context, can be perceived as originality.

I think this is why there's been so many compliments as well as complaints when it comes to 5.5T. The similarities are there, but long-term users recognize the difference in temperature immediately.