stri8ed

It's not a conspiracy. There's a finite amount of compute available, and they will sell it to the highest bidder. If another company can produce the same intelligence for cheaper, then they will drive the price down.

Output cost is 3x from Gemini 3 flash.

Given the cost increase associated with this model, and previous model releases, I think the size is trending upwards, not down.

Is it fair to characterize a founder of a failed startup as a con man? I.e. did he make claims that were factually untrue, and intentionally deceived investors?

What is the counterfactual? Without knowing the number of attacks prevented by these tools, we don't know what the baseline would be.

Not a chance. Even if American companies did abide by it, there is no reason Chinese companies would. And good luck definitely proving that a model trained on it.

That problem along with its many solutions are surely littered throughout the training data. Not to mention, it would be trivial to overfit on that problem. I don't know why people still reference that.

It's a result of the system prompt, not the base model itself. Arguably, this just demonstrates that the model is very steerable, which is a good thing.

Trained at least in part on Chat-GPT data.

It would happen in China regardless what is done here. Removing billionaires does not fix this. The ship has sailed.

The benchmarks agree as well.

Isn't that how previous models were, before the attention is all you need paper?

Or be in the business of building infrastructure for AI inference.