bogtog

> In fact I think long-term autonomy (in the range of several hours) and self-correcting is going to be where we see most improvements in coming years.

Right, model intelligence defines the scope of things they can one shot

I also suspect that users naturally calibrate to a model's useful scope, gradually getting positive/negative feedback and gradually making their requests bigger/smaller than before

I'm surprised I never heard people talking about using -Pro variants, even though their rates ($125-175/M?) aren't drastically larger than old Opus ($75/M), which people seemed to use

I'd be curious if there were some measurements of the final effects, since presumably models wont <think> in caveman speak nor code like that

> Not listed here is how banks themselves have changed to be almost entirely online

Sorry what? Was this not the central theme of the article? (albeit with a title that used the word "iPhone" to be catchier)

> This is wrong. It's not insider trading. Lutnick didn't have inside information. His son just had a brain. Anyone who read the case knew which way the court was going, it was the least surprising decision ever. Perhaps the only surprising thing is that the court ever heard it.

If this was so obvious, wouldn't there have been more competitors pushing down the value of it?

Mr. Less-than-Consistently-Candid strikes again

> But now that most code is written by LLMs, it's as "hard" for the LLM to write Python as it is to write Rust/Go

The LLM still benefits from the abstraction provided by Python (fewer tokens and less cognitive load). I could see a pipeline working where one model writes in Python or so, then another model is tasked to compile it into a more performant language

I figure OP would try and give the models pure text forms of the game?

.....

l....

l....

l.ttt

l..t.

This is fair, but this seems like the only way to test this type of thing while avoiding the risk of harassing tons of farmers with AI emails. In the end, the performance will be judged on how much of a human harness is given

People will pay extra for Opus over Sonnet and often describe the $200 Max plan as cheap because of the time it saves. Paying for a somewhat better harness follows the same logic

The game looks really good, although I think it'd be improved if the sphere was a bit smaller. It feels like it takes too long for the game to become difficult

Oh my reasoning was coming at this from a different angle: H200s were released in November of 2023, so they're over 2 years old at this point while still being valuable

A few months ago, there was a lot of news lambasting tech companies for extending the depreciation lifespan of GPUs from ~3 years to ~5 years. Do these price hikes suggest a longer lifespan is probably the right way to see how long these GPUs will be valuable?

Thanks for sharing. I'm surprised you can't just ctrl-a + copy-paste your bank statement and get it to work easily