Anyone can look and decide if it’s a good picture or not. But the numeric benchmarks don’t tell you much if you aren’t already familiar with that benchmark and how it’s constructed.
if it is indeed a good measure of the quality of the model (hint: it's not) then, logically, it should be taken seriously.
this is, sadly, a great example of the kind of doublethink the "AI" hypesters (yes - whether you like it or not simon - that is what you are now) are all too capable of.
Despite not being a serious benchmark (how could it be serious? It's a pelican riding a bicycle!) it still turned out to have some value. You can see that just by scrolling through the archives and watching it improve as the models improved.
If your definition of doublethink is "holding two conflicting ideas in your head at once" then I would say doublethink is a necessary skill for navigating the weird AI era we find ourselves inhabiting.
doublethink does not mean holding two conflicting ideas in your head at once. it means holding two logically inconsistent positions/beliefs at the same time.
I gave a talk about it last year: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/6/six-months-in-llms/
It should not be treated as a serious benchmark.