holbrad

I can't believe more people don't point out his unbelievably bad track record of predictions. For a public figure, this should be incredibly damning.

Their recently released S-1, though I don't think they do a detailed breakdown.

I couldn't agree more around the ideological friction slowing things down, especially code review. I'd be really curious to get people's thoughts.

Personally I do code review, it's what we do at my workplace, and we regularly improve the agents' code and design though human review, even with Opus 5.5.

But looking at some of the people who are pushing AI development the furthest, I do see the trend towards it just not being that useful anymore.

Real world example:

I use T3Code as my agent orchestrator and it's consistently pretty high quality and works well + regularly gets new useful features.

And with just a handful of maintainers, they're doing anywhere from 100 to 200 PRs a day!

And there are a ton of users of their nightly, which is a rolling 5-hour release, and nothing really breaks. And they have more real-world users than almost all the projects I've worked on before.

So I just can't really in good faith say that this extremely challenging to my world view.

This is such a hilarious comment when we've literally just had Sol 6 and Opus 5.5 drop that are massive wins for efficiency. I mean, how out of touch can you be? Especially if you think power saving and efficiency come from local AI enthusiasts. What a fucking joke.

I was under the impression that GitHub Copilot was much more expensive because you're always paying API rates?

I think this is just a case of the bitter lesson that increasing compute just makes all these predictions meaningless. LLMs just keep going when everyone predicts them to fail constantly.

I've heard very little positive press around Sol 6, with a ton of people preferring Sol 5.6 instead.

I haven't used it much yet, but I have much higher hopes for Sol 6.1, as it seems to be based off of a completely different base, it's not just a tune.

Yes, all those things are fine.

People should be able to build where they want.

We can have reasonable restrictions around noise and pollution, but not on the land use itself.

It seems pretty clear that this is a much larger model than Sol 6, and you can see this in the much lower generation times. I think this is also the main explanation for the $200 plan being cut in terms of API usage.

This is because they have really aggressively priced a larger model to compete with Opus 5.5, so their margins are much worse. Consequently, the equivalent API spend on the subscription is much less.

I think the only answer to this is you're just not using agents enough, because even with the very cheap pricing, it's still easy to rack up a large bill.

That's only true if you're paying API prices, but you really, really should be using the subscriptions. Both the personal and business ones are still really good value.

Well, we're stuck between a left-wing party and a left-wing party, both of whom, despite what they say, hate economic growth and try to restrict it at every opportunity.

And that's largely because the average Brit has terrible beliefs that actively make them poorer. A shockingly high percentage of people believe that building more houses won't lower costs.

>truly air-gapped environments

I don't think people have given much thought about just how hard this would be for large AI models, that need super powerful hardware/cooling etc.

Are you going to air-gap your entire data center?

>token-hungry model

It's kind of funny how this is the exact opposite of the truth. It's one of the most token-efficient models ever.

The claims aren't bullshit. Every conceivable benchmark and test you can throw at it shows Sol being good for token efficiency.

If your benchmark shows Opus 5 winning, I really question the validity of it.