321–330 of 736 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2-4 years is enough to lock them out of the race.
No? They are actively in the race, what are you talking about
I bet you that nothing changed with how Fable 5 is run. "Anthropic has agreed to proactively detect and address security risks associated with the models" LOL, this was already happening. This clown car administration just keeps making shit up and then backpedalling in a way that just leaves everything worse.
I bet you that nothing changed with how Fable 5 is run. "Anthropic has agreed to proactively detect and address security risks associated with the models" LOL, this was already happening. This clown car administration just keeps making shit up and then backpedalling in a way that just leaves everything worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this seems a bit Scrooge-y after all the trouble which was essentially of their own making. I was expecting them to come back with a better deal as an apology, not a worse one.
I assume what they saw during the first coming of Fable gave them pause. Lots of people I know were using it non stop to the point of serious sleep deprivation. I managed to burn 6k in 3 days on it, and was myself using it from the minute it landed till the minute it was shut off. (Yes yes, I know, I am just saying there were stupid people like me swarming the available capacity)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're an enterprise (including startups), you worry about customers, not code quality. There are famously many startups that gained traction despite shit code and then eventually got around to fixing it, to whatever extent was possible, like Facebook HHVM, Stripe's Sorbet, etc.
Startups failed because they cound not untangle own code after 4 months. Literally true stories (plural).
Can't do anything else with GLM 5.2 being widely available and advertised as "Mythos-like", and even Japan dropping a credible model. Actually it would only hurt to keep them in lockdown.
I don't think anyone with a clue seriously thinks of GLM as Mythos like. It's barely Opus-like. The closest comparison is Sonnet 5.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a small software business owner in Europe. I have to assume my competition is willing to pay for any business advantage they can get. And so I also have to pay for the SOTA model, whatever it is.
No you don't; it's often overkill to use the SOTA models. People want SOTA because it's shiny, but there are a lot of tasks where it's cheaper and more efficient to use other models.
Sure… but which ones? How can you know ahead of time?
I just did a “simple” upgrade project where both me and the AI kept tripping over dead code, subtle typos, and difficult-to-trace live versus dead code.
Many times I used “Medium” thinking I got bitten, but not every time, and I couldn’t predict when.
So “Extra high” it was, for the entire project.
Far fewer nasty surprises!
Fable 5 might not be accessible for sub in the future despite their "best effort".
And 5.6-sol is as expensive as 5.5, so highly probable to be kept in sub.
So what's the plan? Hoping people stay on ClaudeCode because Sonnet 5 while Codex offers 5.6-sol to subsription peasants?
Seems risky
The damage is done. You cannot build a business critical function on top of American SOTA frontier model. Especially not with the current crew in charge. Now whether AI tech is in the same league as say Nuclear tech and therefore by any reasonable standard should be regulated is a different question. We hit the slippery slope on a random day in June 2026 and there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Any exec…
I'm a small software business owner in Europe. I have to assume my competition is willing to pay for any business advantage they can get. And so I also have to pay for the SOTA model, whatever it is.
If you make money from doing anything like "produce software with as little human involvement as possible", then sure, you need SOTA models. In that case, though, the value you add is very little and you probably don't have a sustainable business.
OTOH, if you make money by getting clients to pay for features, there is very little difference in time-savings from using Anthropic/OpenAI SOTA over GLM-latest.
IOW, if you business can only make money by one-shotting software, you probably don't have a business in the first place.
Regards, another small business owner.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The good news (for you and most everyone other than the current leading AI companies), the gap between the SOTA and the near-frontiers is getting smaller every week or two. The leading Chinese models are only a few months behind now (GLM 5.2 tickles the tail of GPT 5.3 or 5.4 and Opus 4.6, according to benchmarks and the vibes among heavy users who've spent some time with it), where they were a couple of years behind…
This is nonsense. The gap between Chinese models and American frontier models is estimated at 10 months by Anthropic themselves, and it's growing. China has no flywheel for long-form agentic traces like Claude Code and its telemetry over its userbase (no one uses the Chinese harnesses yet). Most Chinese models are forced to price themselves significantly below cost to compete with the huge demand for bootleg claude t…
I don't know what I was thinking.