I was specifically thinking of US agencies here, see: https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/ODNI-3-November... > CIA now joins DOE and FBI in assessing the more likely cause of the first human COVID-19 infection…
No. A bunch of agencies have started favoring the lab leak hypothesis with low confidence after recently reassessing the evidence. The BND has apparently favored it from the very beginning. Some others still back…
Right, though I didn't explicitly disable thinking for my first attempt either. I'd guess my prompt was less detailed than yours and so ChatGPT (in "Auto" mode) decided to allocate thinking tokens for your questions but…
heh, interesting that. I just tried it twice more with ChatGPT "Instant" (disabling "Auto-switch to Thinking") and it got it wrong both times. Does yours get it right without thinking or tool calls? If so, maybe it does…
I just tried it in ChatGPT "Auto" and it didn't work > Yes — ((((()))))) is balanced. > It has 6 opening ( and 6 closing ), and they’re properly nested. Though it did work when using "Extensive Thinking". The model…
It doesn't address the maintainer's argument which is that the issue exists to attract new human contributors. It's not clear that attracting an OpenClawd instance as contributor would be as valuable. It might just be…
I was specifically thinking of US agencies here, see: https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/ODNI-3-November... > CIA now joins DOE and FBI in assessing the more likely cause of the first human COVID-19 infection…
No. A bunch of agencies have started favoring the lab leak hypothesis with low confidence after recently reassessing the evidence. The BND has apparently favored it from the very beginning. Some others still back…
Right, though I didn't explicitly disable thinking for my first attempt either. I'd guess my prompt was less detailed than yours and so ChatGPT (in "Auto" mode) decided to allocate thinking tokens for your questions but…
heh, interesting that. I just tried it twice more with ChatGPT "Instant" (disabling "Auto-switch to Thinking") and it got it wrong both times. Does yours get it right without thinking or tool calls? If so, maybe it does…
I just tried it in ChatGPT "Auto" and it didn't work > Yes — ((((()))))) is balanced. > It has 6 opening ( and 6 closing ), and they’re properly nested. Though it did work when using "Extensive Thinking". The model…
It doesn't address the maintainer's argument which is that the issue exists to attract new human contributors. It's not clear that attracting an OpenClawd instance as contributor would be as valuable. It might just be…