futureshock

Of course! You can arrive as quickly as you want as the traveler. You can cross the observable universe in a few hours if you add enough 9’s.

I feel like something is being lost in the drama here.

First of all, there has been published work from Diego Cordoba and Luis Martinez-Zoroa that will be in every training set. It was suggestive of the pathway to solve Navier-Stokes.

Then Tristan Buckmaster and Levent Alpoge built on this work using LLMs from OpenAI and Anthropic. Possibly internal models were used from Anthropic. And of course Anthropic wants to credit for solving the first Millennium Problem just as bad as OpenAI. It seems they were getting close and were aware that they might get to Navier-Stokes.

OpenAI swoops in. At a minimum they are aware that Anthropic has either solved a Millennium problem or is close to it. At a maximum they may have Tristan and Levant’s unpublished proofs of related problems.

They then throw a truly staggering amount of compute at Navier-Stokes. They seem to be aware it is the best candidate problem. And they crack it. They are the first with a verified proof.

So the outcome here is that we have a solved Millennium Problem. It’s not the extremely simple narrative that would be easy to understand, “solve Navier-Stokes make no mistakes.” It was a messy race to finish against two unpublished frontier models, a whole bunch of brilliant mathematicians and enough compute to drain a lake. It’s kind of irrelevant which company got there first. They were both within a few months of being capable. I think the thing to remember here is that without LLMs, I don’t think we would have a proof to Navier-Stokes in hand today.

I think it would be an important historical document as well. We are potentially looking at the dawn of AGI and one of the most important models ever created. Each model is also a kind of ultimate time capsule, containing a snapshot of the entire human collective mind. If you wanted to ask a 2002 person what they thought about future historical events you can just ask them directly.

I tried it a few times when I absolutely needed a silent wakeup. It’s very occasionally useful. But then you have to charge the watch for awhile before bed, wear it overnight, then charge it again in the morning. Not something I’m going to do for my regular alarm.

The Apple Watch doesn’t require any pin. Once the watch is unlocked it can be used to pay any time. Quite nifty.

It wasn’t obvious to me! And I’m kind of not even joking. The time has always been on my phone. The watch seemed unnecessary. But having a clock in your face does change your perception of time so it is a killer app after all.

I think you are adjacent to the real story here, but missing it. AI text contains information, certainly. Frontier chatbots are very good at creating acceptable and mostly accurate answers to our questions on just about any topic. It’s an astonishing achievement.

But you are sensing correctly that there’s something missing. It’s the meaning and the speaker. Communication is an exchange between speaker and listener. The speaker has a meaning in mind, and wants to create that same meaning in the mind of the listener. Therein the problem.

There is a listener, sure. But no speaker. No meaning. There is information, but how can this be communication? Nothing is talking. Or at best, we are just talking to ourselves, our own words back at us through the funhouse mirror.

When your mind looks at AI text, you know you can safely ignore it. No one wrote this. No one cares if you read it. You can delete it and nothing of value will be lost. It might contain the information you need, or a bunch of gibberish. There’s no one’s reputation on the line if it’s gibberish.

This. Totally.

I would say I'm quite a power user usually. I very carefully explored every feature my apple watch has and tried to incorporate as many of them as I could. Very, very few features stuck because they were genuinely helpful. Almost everything being pushed is a gimmick or a feature bullet point from some product manager.

The actual good stuff:

Time

Workouts

Payments

The occasionally useful stuff:

Notifications

Noise DB levels to see if I need to put on ear protection

Workoutdoors app for on-device maps and path breadcrumbs

The once in a blue moon stuff:

Music controls and on device playlists

On device audiobooks

Weather complication

Voice memos

Alarm

Shortcut to call my husband

The feature I tried to get working but gave up on: Tap to talk to ChatGPT and get a 100 word or less reply

Judging by the Seedance 2.5 demos today, I’d say it’s not that many orders of magnitude away now.

Could have been worse really. It had an open internet connection. At least it didn’t take the researchers family hostage.

I still think there’s something to be said here for generality. This does not appear to been designed as a cyber pen test tool with specialized harness. From what I understand they were testing GPT-6 in an agent system with GPT-5.6 subagents. It me it’s amazing that a general model could excel on a huge range of tasks like this and new capabilities emerge when a model is multidisciplinary and can combine knowledge and skills from many separate domains.

I think a lot of this has to do with the post-training these models normally get. They are designed to answer basic questions with straightforward and short summary answers. They have the capacity to reason deeply, but they are not biased towards that unless prompted. I think it's because LLMs as they are in 2026 are both highly capable but also parlor tricks. They are not sentient, you just set them up with the context and then they roll downhill. You could reach a genuinely novel answer, but only with the right input. They have no will and depend on human guidance. They are both a marvel and a machine.

There has been a lot of chatter ever since the Mythos scores had been release that SWEbench pro had major contamination and that Mythos had memorized many questions that lacked the context to be solvable on their own. And now with OpenAI saying a large number of the questions are broken, I think it's worth taking that single outlier benchmark with some salt when the overall trend is that 5.6 is very competitive with Mythos at about half the price.

I think this is black and white thinking. Fable and US AI is not unique technology. It’s just marginally better than open source tech at 10 times the price. You can swap out the models at will, they are pretty much fungible. If your use case can pay for a best in class model then you will pay for it no matter the bogeymen. If your best in class model becomes unavailable, you switch to the next best model for a very minor performance degradation. I really doubt this will deter anyone from using American AI.

Yes I was the exact same. I got curious during the GPT-3 release and went over to AI Dungeon. It was just running GPT-2. Hmm wow interesting. This felt new! Then I subscribed so I could use GPT-3 powered AI Dungeon. My jaw dropped. I was talking to that model for weeks. There was a whole human universe in there. You never knew what you could get it to spit out. There were glimmers that this could be huge. It was wild and untamed and practically useless, but there was a behemoth under that prompt.

I was sure this would eventually turn into something. I naturally wanted to converse with it as a chatbot, though it could only stay on task for a few turns. RL and guardrails would come later but it was clearly the foundational step towards AGI for me. From something I thought I would never see in my lifetime to very real and in front of me.

ChatGPT didn't even really rock my world, everything since that moment has been another baby step. But when you take a look back from 2026 models to 2020 it's astounding how far and how fast we've come.