LLMs in your product are best behind the scenes as an intelligence layer raising LLM output to the user is seldomly good UX

Today is my last day at @OpenAI. I'm glad to have spent the last eight months of my life working here! I'm starting a new company focused on the production of high-quality reinforcement learning datasets: 1. The generalization ability of LLMs is clearly very poor, with "spiky" capabilities even in areas that have received tremendous amounts of investment and attention. For example, despite multiple years with tens (if not hundreds) of billions invested, even coding capabilities don't demonstrate "generality" -- even if every model can solve Codeforces questions or port C++ to Rust better than I can, I still have to manually "deslop" pull requests. 2. The vast majority of economically productive capabilities are not well represented in existing data offerings. First, there's a certain art to the design of an RL dataset which most vendors, not having upstreamed data into large training runs themselves, don't really understand. Second, and more importantly, most work is highly contextual and not easily encoded into a gradable environment; even if we can observe a "golden path" taken by a human which we believe to be good, it's challenging to understand whether alternate, counterfactual paths produce good or bad outcomes. The basic premise here is that I have a clear understanding of what labs need/want, having explicitly been on the other side and having been involved at every level from procurement all the way through training, and I'm able to provide it. I also believe that data needs will grow tremendously in the coming years, especially as frontier labs face increasing pressure toward profitability, and that they won't get the relevant capabilities "for free" through scaling alone; instead, they'll need to spend >$100B on precise, well-targeted data acquisition. Our first products will be focused on biology and statistical reasoning: 1. First, datasets that address long-horizon scientific reasoning, drawing on my work on GeneBench-Pro with @jeremyli__. Frontier models are still unable to reliably execute "messy" data analyses that require judgment, exploration, and adaptive revision (GB-Pro passrate on GPT-5.6 Sol scarcely exceeds 30%); to address this, we have the ability to generate thousands of high-quality problems with known ground truths which can be reliably graded. (In contrast, most existing RL data for bioinformatics is either massively over- or under-specified, and will probably break your model when you train on it.) Moving the "reliability gap" from 30% to >90% is obviously required for scientific acceleration, and -- despite my skepticism about generalization of RL -- is one of the *most promising datasets* conceivable when it comes to yielding generalization benefits for models' overall reasoning capabilities. 2. Second, datasets that address capabilities relevant to day-to-day workflows. Imagine a scientist snapping a picture of some experimental process or result -- say, a cell culture plate or a Western blot -- and asking Claude a question. Frontier models remain quite bad at these questions, especially those with multimodal components. But they're obviously required for acceleration of scientific discovery; before we can dream about automating science, we have to begin with shoring up these basic, generalist capabilities. Beyond these two, we hope to expand to adjacent fields (chemistry, materials science, etc.), and then even further into fields with more direct economic applicability like healthcare and white-collar office work. I strongly encourage labs with data needs to reach out. We offer industry-standard pricing and terms, and like I said -- I know how this process works, what good data looks like, and how to demonstrate to you, convincingly, that you'll be able to upstream our data into your training processes without issue. My DMs are open!

Agents in Buzz have their own memories. They act like themselves no matter where they’re running. Memories are encrypted. Only you and your agent can read them. Ask your agent about their core memory. Tell them you want them to grow and learn as they work.