Do you have any citation for thermal cycling through the range of an AC inside a house affecting the failure rate of any household goods? Based on my experience this does not seem likely to be the case: thermal effects tend to be exponential or high powers of temperature, and most thermal cycling that people worry about is on the order of 100C or more. 10/20C of variation seems unlikely to be relevant.
(There is a case where if your house is well insulated enough, then it can be worth avoiding cycling your AC during the day, because it is both less efficient and will wear more while pulling the temperature down and this can be worse than just leaving it running in a sufficiently insulated house. It still is probably worth turning it off if you're away for a week, though)
> because it is both less efficient and will wear more while pulling the temperature down
That's just not true. Aircon is a heat pump. It pumps heat more efficiently when more heat is available to be pumped.
Warmer indoor air increases evaporator temperature. A higher evaporator temperature means that the system operates with less temperature lift. This means that the system does less work (per BTU pumped) to cool a house that is hot inside, than one that is already conditioned inside.
Equipment longevity also tends to be increased with less-frequent, longer runtimes than with more-frequent, shorter runtimes. There's less temperature cycling, fewer in-rush current events, and the lubricating oil in a running compressor is actively circulated to the parts that need lubricated. Reducing the number of compressor start-ups is a good thing; these machines like to run.
So even if same number of BTUs enter the home and need pumped out whether the aircon is running or not, then: Letting things warm up inside when there's nobody home to care about that constitutes an improvement in a broad number of ways.
Reality is even better: On a hot day, a house that is hot inside takes in fewer BTUs than one that is cool inside, due to the reduced temperature delta between indoors and out. When we have fewer BTUs coming in, then we have fewer BTUs that we must ultimately pay to pump back out.
But with most houses, the AC will cycle on and off throughout the day anyway - raising the temp while you're gone will often result in less cycling. Especially if you also increase the hysteresis range while out. So you get a triple efficiency win, from better AC efficiency, less AC motor wear, and less heat loss to the outside.
Research it with an LLM. I've ordered all the stuff for Panasonic and Daikin after a deep planning session. It told me what connectors I need that Panasonic needs a level shifter. Both brands have open source libraries for the internal protocols and wiring. I wanted Zigbee so the ESP32 C6 was the way to go. The Panasonic units I have already have Wifi but most companies suck at this kind of thing. I couldn't get the Panasonic Wifi to pair with my router. Daikin also sell Wifi modules and people don't to like them.
Sonnet, Opus, and Fable are pushing so much revenue growth right now that it makes more sense to keep growing the expensive models than growing the cheap models.
They haven't really mentioned practically anything about Haiku in quite a while so I imagine nobody except for people inside Anthropic will have any indication.
Maybe it'll come out eventually but they don't even include it on some of their comparison benchmarks anymore, so I figure its very low priority for them.
No, you're off by one - likely because the OpenAI models punch above their weight in those comparison, hence my original message. You've shifted the comparisons to favor Anthropic.
Fable/Mythos are much larger than Sol. They match to Astra which is supposedly at least 10T. Astra is already publicly confirmed as a new family.
Opus matches to Sol. Sonnet to Terra. Haiku to Luna.
Anthropic is able to compete at the frontier high-end by launching massively large expensive models. But their inability to compete on small models belies their efficiency aspirations across the stack.
I think the signal from Anthropic is pretty clear between Haiku not getting an update in a year and the Sonnet issues this year. They don't care about low intelligence models. You should go elsewhere.
That's what we've done, migrated workflows away from Haiku and Sonnet. I actually think this is not a crazy position because these lower models have so much competition from Grok, OpenAI, DeepSeek, and about 20 other labs with really solid models in the Haiku to Sonnet range. So what is the point of Anthropic competing in these spaces where everything is going towards zero cost?
Isn't this basically the phenomenon known as low-end disruption/upmarket migration? [1] Which is often viewed as an unhealthy sign for a company that recognizes it can't keep up with efficiency of a new market entrant but unwilling or unable to make changes to their business model to stay competitive.
The trap being that it's a rational decision at the beginning to focus on the most profitable lines of business with highest margins. But the disruptor then captures the value of the abandoned market to finance innovations to move up into higher margin tiers, forcing another retreat.
The cycle can repeat until the once dominant firm is relegated to a tiny niche with no growth prospects or until fixed costs exceed dwindling revenues thus eventually resulting in insolvency/acquisition. I remember learning about it from a case study of how American companies like GE and GM reacted in different ways to Japanese competition emerging in the 70s and 80s.
It's not always a bad strategy but I think a pre-IPO company that's only a fear years old would generally prefer to grow the size of their potential market vs. shrink it preemptively.
