My model was just that o3 was undergoing safety evals still, and quite plausibly running into some issues with the preparedness framework. My model of OpenAI Preparedness (epistemic status: anecdata+vibes) is that they are not Prepared for the hard things as we scale to ASI, but they are relatively competent at implementing the preparedness framework and slowing down releases if there are issues. It seems intuitively plausible that it’s possible to badly jailbreak o3 into doing dangerous things in the “high” risk category.
AFAIK the only info about the (lack of) release of o3 comes from this tweet—and it does seem like o3 will be available explicitly via the API. I think it’s what you say—pricing causing bad PR. It seems that even for pro users, if you use o1 pro too much they will silently switch you to using o3 mini without telling you even if you select o1 pro. So I think they want to continue doing this while not looking so bad doing it.
My model was just that o3 was undergoing safety evals still, and quite plausibly running into some issues with the preparedness framework. My model of OpenAI Preparedness (epistemic status: anecdata+vibes) is that they are not Prepared for the hard things as we scale to ASI, but they are relatively competent at implementing the preparedness framework and slowing down releases if there are issues. It seems intuitively plausible that it’s possible to badly jailbreak o3 into doing dangerous things in the “high” risk category.
AFAIK the only info about the (lack of) release of o3 comes from this tweet—and it does seem like o3 will be available explicitly via the API.
I think it’s what you say—pricing causing bad PR. It seems that even for pro users, if you use o1 pro too much they will silently switch you to using o3 mini without telling you even if you select o1 pro.
So I think they want to continue doing this while not looking so bad doing it.