Okay this is just getting suspicious. Their excuses for keeping the chain of thought hidden are dubious at best [1], and honestly just seemed anti-competitive if anything. Worst is their argument that they want to monitor it for attempts to escape the prompt, but you can't. However the weirdest is that they note that:
> for this to work the model must have freedom to express its thoughts in unaltered form, so we cannot train any policy compliance or user preferences onto the chain of thought.
Which makes it sound like they really don't want it to become public what the model is 'thinking'. This is strengthened by actions like this that just seem needlessly harsh, or at least a lot stricter than they were.
Honestly with all the hubbub about superintelligence you'd almost think o1 is secretly plotting the demise of humanity but is not yet smart enough to completely hide it.
> for this to work the model must have freedom to express its thoughts in unaltered form, so we cannot train any policy compliance or user preferences onto the chain of thought.
Which makes it sound like they really don't want it to become public what the model is 'thinking'. This is strengthened by actions like this that just seem needlessly harsh, or at least a lot stricter than they were.
Honestly with all the hubbub about superintelligence you'd almost think o1 is secretly plotting the demise of humanity but is not yet smart enough to completely hide it.
[1]: https://openai.com/index/learning-to-reason-with-llms/#hidin...