platinumrad

The thing I don't like about minimal plugin-based harnesses is that I don't always have the time to figure out which plugins and safe and sensible, and at least one of those is false more often than not when it comes to AI tools. Sorting by popular does not solve the problem.

Cut from the same "rationalist" cloth.

GLM 5.2 was used by Hugging Face for defense when they were being hacked by OpenAI because the guardrails on closed models meant they refused to help.

There are very practical reasons to not hire someone who abruptly dips after less than a year on the job that have nothing to do with being punitive.

The contrast between Anthropic, who seem to be training their models to output ever-increasing numbers of reasoning tokens, and Fireworks's Ember-1, which was explicitly trained to preserve the quality of a model's responses while cutting down on reasoning, is interesting. Claude Code also uses more many tokens per task per model than any other harness in benchmarks.

This says more about Artificial Analysis than either model.

> However I imagine those that are upset about CEO pay will find this unconvincing. Is there any other way to interpret this?

Judging by your recent comments, you seem to have an axe to grind with people who are "upset about CEO pay" and I don't think it's possible to convince you to look any things from any other angle.

A CEO abruptly resigning is read by the market as a signal. Unless you think this person is ~$6.5B more valuable than any potential replacement, the full quantity of the loss cannot be ascribed to the value he provides as an employee.

> For those wrongly convicted, I don't want them to get air-conditioning in prison

???

A gift to the frontier lab marketing departments before their IPOs.

Your entire comment history really is just this, huh.

Your entire recent comeback history is defenses of Anthropic. Do you work for them?

OpenAI and Anthropic are neck and neck: https://www.felonybench.com/

I don't think either of these companies are great, then, but Anthropic is surely worse. The doom marketing is one of the most unethical things an AI company can be doing.

The first one terrifies people who really don't need to be. It's deeply unethical.

Given that Anthropic models are very verbose and OpenAI models can be very concise, wouldn't a count of expected task completions be a better measurement than raw API costs?

The words have the very practical problem of not communicating anything of substance. I guess "we want regulatory capture" didn't have quite the same ring.

It's a big company, like Microsoft or Google. Some of their products are good and some are bad.

Is that website actually associated with the creators of the model or is it just some random slop repackaging the OpenRouter listing?

Are you accusing them of astroturfing? Why is it strange for someone to say something topical?

Suleyman's entire point is that AI should not be anthropomorphized.

Microsoft is a big house, and in this case Suleyman's criticism of Anthropic's not-so-subtle attempts to convince the world that Claude has a "soul" is entirely correct.

Surely we can do better than Nixon and Reagan.

> We now have Sam Altman and Dario Amodei telling us

I don't believe them.

Sure, it might take more than a single paragraph for that grating feeling to sink in, but none of the entries from the Un-Slop Fiction Prize[1] impressed me.

[1] https://www.hyperstitionai.com/unslop

> There's clearly no intelligence task that AIs can't do due to some magic fundamental constraint.

Yes there is: write an English paragraph that doesn't make me want to claw my eyes out. LLMs are not better than human mathematicians (or security researchers) in all respects, just some specific ways (e.g. not having to take a lunch break) that make them good at exhaustively searching for an answer, given the right constraints.

They surpass the best human mathematicians in one specific way: they don't get tired or bored.

Anthropic is a company full of basilisk believers.

> At OpenAI, many have not deeply internalized the civilizational stakes. At Anthropic, the stakes are well-understood, but they are locked in a race to get there first - they believe no one else will act responsibly, so they must do it themselves, despite the risk.

OpenAI are mercenaries, Anthropic is a cult. I know which I prefer.

Are there consequences for lying in sworn testimony?

Funny. Dario seems like the biggest snake in the industry to me and has leaned the hardest into doom marketing out of all of the influential leaders. With Altman (or Google), it's a transaction, and that's something I can live with.