simianwords

> The argument you made implies that System 2 is just a more capable System 1, which is not what the book (nor this paper, AIUI) proposes.

No, system 2 is the emergent capability to reason and increase the space of places to find the answer. Forget the paper's proposal, and look at the problem it is trying to solve. Ability to give quick answers, ability to give thought out answers, and the ability to know when to choose what. Adaptive reasoning does all three.

> This means that any System 1 will run the input once through the heuristics, using the same computational power and taking the same time whether the input is 100 tokens or 1 million tokens, for quick but perhaps wrong decision (not "answer").

No, I don't think we humans use o(1) to for understanding 1000 tokens or 2 tokens. I simply don't think that's the case. There's a new model called "Jev" and it is literally named System 1 (from the book) and even it is billed per input token.

> it's that the system itself decides how to reason based on the nature of the problem it faces, given the model's world model.

do you even know how adaptive reasoning works?

Asking earnestly, I don’t know what you mean by this reply. I know what system 1 and 2 is. But this has already been solved using same model.

This has already been solved by GPT 5 Adaptive reasoning. A single model that knows when to reason or not based on a thinking parameter we provide (like xhigh). What’s the relevancy to post it today?

edit: why is this downvoted?

His case was materially different

1. Unauthorised network access

2. Intent to distribute licensed material

The labs aren’t doing this. They are doing something similar to you and I downloading torrents. Look, I also think laws should apply somewhat equally to individuals and companies. But this is different.

Yes it’s all hype to cash in the ipo before the bubble bursts. The labs are spreading spooky things about AI so that people think these models are very capable. It is a coordinated effort amongst all labs. The reality is that these models can’t do basic mathematics.

Sure it’s not free for anyone and both companies and individuals are treated similarly. It’s not like you will be jailed for pirating movies. And neither should OpenAI. What part of this is hard to understand

Aaron was sued for distributing and not for pirating. They are different offences

So we now know without any ambiguity that the OpenAI agents hacked the us government and multiple other websites.

Maybe.. just maybe.. it is because of this that they want to pause?

Why do people keep talking about circular financing? It’s hardly a drop in the ocean and doesn’t change the underlying financials. Is it 30% of revenue? 10%? Is it priced in the market? I think it’s around 5% of revenue and already priced. It’s a nothingburger.

I would take ketamine if it helps me perform better without adverse side effects.

You’d rather paint AI as if it were a hard drug to cope with the world changing around you. I mean listen to yourself. Im not the one making conspiracy theories.

Yes it has happened to me and it’s good that it’s happening. Life is always about finding the right abstraction to work on.

Why don’t you start a company where AI is banned. Surely it will do much better. In fact, you should also believe that most companies will bad AI for the same reason.

Smh new conspiracy theories every day. “Ai is actually a drug and you only feel that it helps you but it doesn’t”

New conspiracy theory just dropped.

In what way is hype quantified and different from stock market valuations? The stock market already captures public sentiment on future earnings, I.e hype.

Speculation of what? There are models today that perform better than Haiku at 47x lower cost.

Excessive skepticism does no good.

Also the author is deliberately chooses a model that is 1 year old and was supposed to be underpowered even then. If cost was deciding factor, they could’ve chosen Luna.

  Model                       AA Index   Cost/task
  Claude 4.5 Haiku (thinking)    17       $0.21
  GPT-6 Luna (max)               37       $0.07
  GPT-6 Sol (low)                34       $0.13
  GPT-6 Sol (medium)             40       $0.25

Luna (low) scores higher and costs about 47x less per task and performs better.

And Luna (max) scores 37 while still 30% of the cost of Haiku which scored 17.

Why deliberately choose a model that is known to be poor and also costly?

Author doesn’t understand cost dynamics of the industry - that prices keep falling.

Author also needs to make a point, and can’t do so if they are using a powerful model.

Gartner hype cycle is pseudoscience. I tried to understand what the y axis is and how they measure it. Any answers here? Surely it’s not market cap.

> The demo uses Claude Haiku rather than newer models like Opus or Fable. This is because I'm assuming that shopping agents of the future won't use newer, more expensive models, even though they're more reliable and secure. I suspect it'll come down to cutting costs, and using a cheaper model is one of the easiest ways to save money.

Stopped reading here. Author has little idea of the industry.

Wrong! If you don't you allow anyone to come to your country to create nuisance, you are fascist, ok?

this is so tiring. you obviously know what he meant by native. the way you painted him looked like he made obvious errors in statistics.

you obviously know this because you know what "native americans" means.

well if you were Anthropic and you didn't want the government using your technology in these ways, how would you phrase it? What else would you have done?

I have had really good experiences with designing architecture with agents. It is much much better than humans and frankly, if my colleagues had used agents to design their new services, we'd have been in much better place.

All the things that help societies function in a stable way. So please also add All Cops Are Bad and prisons are bad and so on.

There was a recent video doing rounds in twitter. An eclectic group of doomers and truthers who found an unusual common ground on hating on AI.

Nate Soares (doomer high priest who has called for pause before LLMs were a thing) was explaining why AI should be stopped due to x-risks. Ed zitron (truther extraordinaire) asks him what has he done to stop it which is funny when Nate spent big part of his life on this mission.

It was strange watching two people who have completely different ideas on AI speaking on a common ground

> I think the existential risks many people are warning about deserve to be taken seriously

Dude, if some one is telling you that

1. it is getting better in capability and they want it to stop

2. literal existential risks of humanity due to AI deserve to be taken seriously

3. they have left their job because of it

its obvious that they are scared of it, no? How else do they feel about it lol? Happy? Neutral?

> I’m confident that AI capability will continue to keep increasing steadily as long as we keep working on it. I wish that AI would hit some kind of plateau, or that we would identify important human cognitive abilities that AI will never replicate without a paradigm shift, but I don’t expect those wishes to come true

What’s interesting is that there are two types of doomers. Those who are scared about the capability of AI (like the author) and others like Zitron who think AI is hype and there are no capabilities. Lot of discussions get muddled because of this confusion between the type of doomers.

Wut? Bubble bursting doesn’t mean bottlenecks can’t exist lol. Bubble can burst if projected revenues can’t be met. Unless you think revenues projected 15 years in future are hampered due to this news, it has nothing to do with bubbles.