Are the Artificial Analysis benchmarks really worthwhile any more?
They really don't seem to match my real-world experience, and based on the comments I see I don't think that match most other people's either.
For example, Opus 5 was at the top for some time. My experience is that it's not noticeably better than Opus 4.8, and it definitely seems worse than Fable 5, which AA benchmarks put behind Opus 5.
GPT 5.6-sol and Opus 5 seem pretty interchangeable, although Sol is noticeably better at finding problems in code, particularly edge cases.
You guys are so daft about it. The fact that you do not see what work goes to keep company running and be responsible for thousands of people still having their jobs…
Some work is 24/7 basically, when you have to keep business afloat there are no sick days or worse days. Your brain is 24/7 preoccupied with the work.
Meanwhile you walk out after 8 hours and stop caring at all because - someone else does
Someone else grinds to provide you with employment so there is work at all and the company keeps sailing.
I am sure you guys are smart, adults. stop being so childish and immature. You are better than that
(Corroboration, not deduction: "has four legs, so it is more probably a cat". That is vs falsification: "short, hence not all managers are tall". Which does not work anyway going from the logical context to the stochastic context, because it becomes "the exception that confirms the rule". I trust you knew, but.)
As I always say, CEOs are corporate status symbols. "Look how successful we are, our CEO is super-handsome, went to William and Mary, and we pay him $15 million a year"
> One of the miners, rejected on account of his size, offered to fight any man there as proof of his suitability as a soldier, and six men were eventually called upon to remove him.
Depends on the board. The premium CEO robot will be powered by a bio-ethanol fuel cell so that it can play golf with the board of directors for as long as drinks are available.
That’s how leaders throughout history have worked. Usually you prove your mettle in the first half of your career and then do the hard work of being the face of the company once you’re an executive. Diminishing what a leader does is the foremost underling cliché throughout all of history.
You're hearing the echo and ascribing it to the noise.
A constant push and pull between leaders and the led is the fundamental. Criticism in both directions is necessary and healthy, and at different times both correct and misplaced.
There have been great leaders and awful ones. Acting as if all leaders are proven and deserving is as asinine as naming all CEOs as useless.
Right now we are at a point where CEOs are biased towards being quite anti worker and too easily rewarded. It's not surprising the cliches against them come out.
I would argue the bias is for ceos (of public companies) to act a certain way due to inherent incentives the way the world is set up, which biases their personality. But I won't go into that old argument again.
Last 5-6 years: COVID surge in HN brings in more people
Last 3-4 years: General rise in AI topics which have broad appeal and brought in a lot of people
Last 2-3 years: More overtly political discourse on HN bringing in more people
Last 1-2 years: Bots start coming in, some are very obvious, but they have gotten better and better to the point its hard to tell anymore.
Last year: Sharp rise in shallow redditor-style comments, especially in cultural/political discussions comments that are snarky but contribute little to discussion outside of affirmations like "Laws are for poor people"
I don't know. Every big tech company I worked at has a lot of turnover. Then every Blind post says "its so over" or "everything is going to change" But that doesn't happen.
A year ago everybody in San Francisco was saying the entire world was about to be blindsided by the fundamental changes that would happen in the next 8-12 months and, well, that just hasn't happened.
The short version I give to non-technical people who ask me about whether "AI will replace coding" is this: it accelerates you. You can get much further much more quickly.
If you don't know where you're going or how to get there, or even if you're just not paying enough attention, it will get you very far in the wrong direction before you've realised.
Although I guess now Australia has ludicrous levels of solar per capita - they're famously launching 3 hours/day of free electricity to try to soak it all up.
Yes, Norway leads. But it's not an apples with apples comparison.
Norway is a smallish country (you can fit 24 Norway's in Australia - so less range anxiety), whose government pushed the transition to EV's hard. Australia has the worlds most competitive new car market and with one of the least restrictive emissions controls on ICE engines.
It's not that surprising that Norway's government engineered transition to EV's was successful. In Australia EV's became around the same price as ICE vehicles in the last 12 months, and it feels like we've hit a market driven tipping point.
If battery developments take their predicted path, with pricing dropping about 10% per years and range per unit weight doubling, it's difficult to see how it isn't all over bar the shouting - for USA car manufacturing.
Trump sealed the USA's fate, when his changes EV policies lead to $51B in direct write downs. I don't see how you can recover from that.
Right. Australia is crazy sunny. You might intuitively expect there'd be more PV power closer to the equator but that's not how it works, Australia just doesn't have as much cloud as almost anywhere on Earth, especially places a bunch of people actually live - and so that's a lot more energy ("insolation") from the sun ready to harvest.
The discussion of Glasswing in particular gives it the feeling of something bigger than just a hallucination, but unless you work at Anthropic we can only guess.
Um...If I make an app that reroutes people's payments so that I can skim a percent off the top and release it for Android and IPhone as a shopping app, how would it be Google and Apple's fault?
Sure they try to vet the app but how does that absolve me from the liability?
I don't know where you get the idea this is a nation state attack.
The devices are used to sell proxy services and scam advertisers. This doesn't even need particularly large organised crime. It would certainly be easier than large scale illicit drug importation and retail, which is happening all the time.
Could China exploit these streaming sticks if it wanted to? Maybe, but no more than any other nation.
Not necessarily correlated to this, but my perception is that china is generally ok with many types of crime as long as it’s not perpetrated on its citizens / aimed at foreigners (IP theft / counterfeit goods / cyber crime etc). However, I also think the state largely has a good sense of the actor or players and is perfectly capable of exerting force or coercing them to their cause at will.
They really don't seem to match my real-world experience, and based on the comments I see I don't think that match most other people's either.
For example, Opus 5 was at the top for some time. My experience is that it's not noticeably better than Opus 4.8, and it definitely seems worse than Fable 5, which AA benchmarks put behind Opus 5. GPT 5.6-sol and Opus 5 seem pretty interchangeable, although Sol is noticeably better at finding problems in code, particularly edge cases.
reply