It's exact same price as Sol 6.1 announced yesterday.

I guess if one of them hits singularity, it could in theory just wipe out all the rest, seeing how they keep escaping and hacking into other systems :)

> I guess if one of them hits singularity, it could in theory just wipe out all the rest

The story that some AI company might reach singularity and then "everything will be different" is another science-fiction story that executives of AI companies love to tell to justify the staggering amount of necessary investments and cash burn. :-)

> If we theoretically hit the point where it could do all of its research itself, better than a human, things _would_ be different.

If we theoretically found a way to shield or reverse gravity, things in aviation or space travel would be different. Or if we theoretically found a way to make cold fusion work, things would be very different. :-)

It is in my opinion not a good idea to invest in companies for which the feasibility of the business models depends on the capability of making science-fiction stories work.

the likeliness of achieving AGI is an unknown, but it's certainly not 0

I'm skeptical of anyone that has absolute confidence in either direction, to be honest. It's clearly an unknown.

Our current capabilities were science fiction a very short time ago, and we are still improving in multiple areas simultaneously (hardware, algorithms, scaling, data efficiency, inference...). We don't really know what the limit is yet.

Reversing gravity seems to counteract the current knowledge of the physical laws, but human-level intelligence doesn't (it has already been achieved once), and there's enough reason to believe that human-level intelligence itself is not a fundamental limit (energy usage constraints in evotution, brain-size limit fitting through the birth canal, etc).

I find it quite unique how many people buy into this. Its the worlds most blatant conflict of interest, I dont even know why Sam and Dario bother doing interviews

> and google just started letting all their engineers use claude

That's misleading.

1. Having different models available is useful for A/B testing and helping improve Gemini itself.

2. They have an enterprise offering for Antigravity (their agentic coding platform), and they need to test that it works well with non-Gemini models too.

> late last year/early this year

That's an eternity when it comes to coding models.

In my personal experience, we've had almost a step change every ~3 months this year, at least for bigger one-shot tasks. For example looking at Gemini Flash 3.0 vs 3.5 vs 3.8, it went 5% -> 30% -> 75% on DeepSWE, all since the start of the year.

In one sense you're right.

In another one, Opus 4.6 level already solved 90% of my work-day tasks, so while better models have been instrumental into handling a higher % that does not mean that defaulting on cheaper models can't be good.

I run DS 4.1 flash daily, and then cross check with gpt-6-astra and I've nuked 90% of my AI monthly bill while having higher limits and better performance/intelligence than I did just at the beginning of this summer.

tbf, I the happiest I've been working with claude is late last year/early this year (before March)...

That's because Opus 4.6 was the last good assistant model.

Everything after it might be more "intelligent" but is super tuned around end-to-end task (and related benchmarks), not to act as an assistant.

Now it's *you* being the assistant, reviewer, etc.

Is that right? Why the shit would that happen?

Because they’ve essentially exhausted pre training scaling and are looking to post training to expand capabilities, which is really just optimization via reinforcement learning against specific tasks aka bench maxing.

Their ambition isn't your work being amplified by their model, they want you running fifty autonomous long-running agents.

From my experience, it's quite hit and miss for every app.

If you use Google 99% of the time and only check other apps when Google is wrong, then that's a biased experiments.

I disagree.

Similar to you, 95% of the time I do the simple use case that I've memorized. The problem is that even after a decade of using Git, when I get into those 5% where something goes wrong, I have no idea how to actually solve it. None of it makes any sense in my head, and I have to search for a bunch of magical commands to run, or nuke things to get back to a good state.

With JJ, it just makes sense. It's intuitive and clear. I have been able to recover without any help. Just the undo alone is basically a life saver. Rebasing and merge conflict resolution is so much simpler.

Yes I probably won't use it to its full potential, but still, the little I do use makes 10x more sense than Git ever did.

I don't understand why the fact that it's an Airbnb really matters here? Unless a large number of apartments are meant to be empty, why does it matter if the tenant is short term or long term? Is it that short term users leave and enter their apartment more often?

I am of course just speculating (and I had a lot of waiting time to think about this), but there are a lot of people with a lot of luggage constantly going in and out. It makes the elevators be full faster (perhaps there is a weight based sensor to determine if the elevator is full, and the luggage tricks the system into thinking the elevator is not full yet, because a piece of luggage is lighter than a person but sometimes takes up more floor space than a person). Furthermore, people with luggage take longer to get in and out.

It's a tower in Kuala Lumpur btw. Since it is rather hot here and the elevators are not airconditioned, it's extra uncomfortable.

TIL that there are countries where the building code doesn't enforce the minimum number of elevators. In Russia it's one for buildings taller than 5 floors, two for taller than 9, and I believe three for taller than 16 (every 20-something-floor building I've ever been to had at least three). But we don't have many skyscrapers so I'm not sure how it works for those.

Amusing anecdotes and musings about your stay (well, amusing to read, probably not to live).

Since you’ve got a bunch of enforced idle time, maybe see if you can find the architect firm and see if you can get the backstory? Why three elevators in a 60 floor building? Just low level sadism, or what?

Because they are short-term and many are staying just for the day + bringing family (like kids, which is why they use AirBNB instead of a hotel). The check-in/check-out already add an entry-exit if the user is staying 24 hours only.

It’s not super common to stay in one place only 24h when traveling with kids. Other than the luggage, tourists and residents move in an out of the building just the same. People who live there also need to go to work or school every morning, and come back in the afternoon creating choke points. And these people are there every day, not a handful of seasonal tourists.

The problem is probably the same as every other super tall building. It was impressive for the potential buyers but designed poorly and this only became apparent after they lived there a while (crappy elevators, probably often defective, building sway, plumbing issues, etc). So the owners started to move out and it’s possible the building is mostly short term rental now.