archon1410

The drop-proof design is good selling point even for adults. Few phones and tablets come that rugged from the factory. The long battery life/playback time too. Might see some use among adults if wasn't stuck with the $9/month subscription.

Good points. Though GPT 5.5 Instant does beat out 5.6 Luna non-thinking 34 to 27 on Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index.[1][2] This could mean it is optimised for non-reasoning perfomance. So even if beaten on cost and performance, it could still be on the pareto frontier for speed.

It probably costs them a substantial amount of money everyday to not replace Instant with Luna, making it less likely the amount of people upgrading just for Luna would be enough to offset the costs.

[1]https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gpt-5-6-luna-non-reason... [2]https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gpt-5-5-instant-05-26

If Luna is so good and cheap, I'm wondering why ChatGPT Free users still only have access to GPT 5.5 Instant. The API pricing for chat-latest is the same as Sol(!),[1] while Luna is 25× cheaper [2]. Even assuming highly inflated API pricing for chat-latest, Luna not being the daily driver on Free and Go plans feels off.

Perhaps users prefer instant responses over thinking models so much so that using a more expensive and less performant non-thinking model is worthwhile.

[1] https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/chat-latest [2] https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.6-luna

Surely it was meant to be "Gwen" (the protagonist's cousin and the other main character in the show). I guess it was somehow (incorrectly) assumed to be a misspelling of Qwen and included in the tags. Or perhaps many people were misspelling Gwen as "Qwen" and it was all hoovered up.

> look like

It "looks like" they have emotions because they have the same conscious experiences and emotions for the same evolutionary reasons as humans, who are their cousins on the tree of life. The reason a lot of "animal cruelty" is not banned is the same as for why slavery was not banned for centuries even though it "looked like" the enslaved classes have the same desires and experiences as other humans—humans can ignore any amount of evidence to continue to feel that they are good people doing good things and bear any amount of cognitive dissonance for their personal comfort. That fact is a lot scarier than any imagined harm that can come out "anthropomorphism".

My disdain is for the fact that hundreds of millions of Indians cannot access higher education in their native language, and instead of simply learning a foreign language as a subject like the rest of world, they have the bear the burden[1] of learning things in a foreign language which they have to simultaneously learn. I have disdain for the people responsible for this mess. I do not have any disdain for any language-speaking class, specially not one which I might be part of.

[1]https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2168

You should take that up with the IMO then, or all of European Union. They provide services in ~two dozen languages.

It is not "supremacist" to believe that depriving hundreds of millions of people from higher education in their native language is deeply unjust. This reflection was prompted by a comment on why Indian languages are not represented in international competitions, which was prompted by a comment on the competition being available in many languages.

Discussions online have a tendency to go off into tangents like this. It's regrettable that this is such a contentious topic.

Yes, and there's also languages of ex-USSR countries, whose competitors presumably all understand Russian, and so on.

The real reason might be that there's an enormous class of self-loathing elites in India who actively despise the possibility of any Indian language being represented in higher education. This obviously stunts the possibility of them being used in international competitions.

And of course it's available even in Icelandic, spoken by ~300k people, but not a single Indian language, spoken by hundreds of millions.

भारत दुर्दशा न देखी जाई...

Seems like all the p(doom) is coming from Elon himself, and not the AI. An "empowered" but unintelligent "stochastic parrot", which seems to be his view of LLMs, is more likely to hinder than help with one's plan for world domination and annihilation.

> If DeepSeek said May

It is pretty strange that DeepSeek didn't say May anywhere, that was also a Reuters report based on "three people familiar with the company".[1] DeepSeek itself did not respond and did not make any claims about the timeline, ever.

[1]: https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/d...

The original Vending-Bench paper from Andon Labs might be of interest: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15840

The blog itself reads as if it was written by an LLM. (e.g. "This isn't about X, it's about Y." "... is timely ..." "X isn't Y".)

Weird.

And it has been discussed to death already:

Beware General Claims about “Generalizable Reasoning Capabilities” (of Modern AI Systems) [https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5uw26uDdFbFQgKzih/beware-gen...]

Seven replies to the viral Apple reasoning paper and why they fall short [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44278403]

I see, I wasn't aware of that. The earliest attempt I knew of was from May 2024,[1] while this gpt-4-vision attempt is from November 2023. I guess Claude Plays Pokemon was the first attempt that had any real success (won a badge), and got a lot of attention over its entertaining "chain-of-thought".

[1] https://community.aws/content/2gbBSofaMK7IDUev2wcUbqQXTK6/ca...

Claude Plays Pokemon was the original concept and inspiration behind "Gemini Plays Pokemon". Gemini arguably only did better because it had access to a much better agent harness and was being actively developed during the run.

See: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7mqp8uRnnPdbBzJZE/is-gemini-...

The naming scheme used to be "Claude [number] [size]", but now it is "Claude [size] [number]". The new models should have been named Claude 4 Opus and Claude 4 Sonnet, but they changed it, and even retconned Claude 3.7 Sonnet into Claude Sonnet 3.7.

Annoying.

Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for this!

The "first MP3", without the background music, and just the voice, sounds a lot better to me than the original I listened to on YouTube. I liked the MP3 more.

Any way for me to find similar stuff? Just a good voice singing stuff, without music? I know acapella, and some of it is good, but I'm thinking of something more specific. Just one person singing without music I guess, something poetic.

I had the same impression, but apparently not.

> Many data centers rely on evaporative cooling, or “swamp cooling,” where warm air is drawn through wet pads. Data centers typically evaporate about 80% of the water they draw, discharging 20% back to a wastewater treatment facility, according to Shaolei Ren, an associate professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of California, Riverside.

I've also noticed this. Google Search is vastly superior to any LLM (including their own LLM Gemini) for any "tip of my tongue" questions, even the ones that don't contain any exact-match phrase and require natural language understanding. This is surprising. What technology are they using to make Search so amazing at finding obscure stuff from descriptions, while LLMs that were supposed to be good at this badly fail?

> Political elites tend to be highly coherent

Coherence might not the word you're looking for. The policies of political parties and groups are born out of historical circumstances and the diverse coalitions they represent. Political elites are "coherent" in the sense that you can expect them to consistently follow the party line, and thus infer all of their views just by knowing one of their views.

The party line, i.e. platform of the Democratic and Republican parties, or any other large political party in the world, is, by itself, nothing coherent though. Many of their policies and claims do not make any more sense besides each other than they would make against each other. Realignments on issues are pretty common across the world. What is left-wing in one part of the world at one point of time might be rightist across space and time.

Wouldn't drawing energy from the crust cool it down, and wouldn't a cooler crust in turn 'draw' more heat from the lower layers? I guess the earth already radiates out a lot of energy, the process of extracting geothermal energy will presumably lead it to radiate more energy. I don't know by how much though, or if it will make any real difference, or if that's how it even works.

It's apparently publicists "pitching" stories to 'relevant' reporters and 'influencers'/YouTubers.

I recently saw a xeet, from a columnist, complaining about irrelevant PR pitches; it gives some insight into how they work. See: https://x.com/dhume/status/1892994787734602001

Perhaps a stupid question, but... what are the risks? Wolndn't extracting too much energy from the earth's core cool it down, at least a little bit? Or does it contain so much energy that extracting it to replace all of 'surface generation' won't make even a little difference?

You're confused. It's the Vickery auction which is second-price. English auctions are first-price. First-price sealed bid auctions are different from Vickery auctions.

No, I am asking why they would knowingly desire the approval of those who prefer "irredeemable" candidates. They would either have to lie a lot to get it, or pull themselves down to be more reprehensible. So, what's their strategy? Lieing a lot after telling the "one truth", or becoming more reprehensible themselves? Probably both.

It implies that either they themselves are even more reprehensible and irredeemable, or the majority of US voters are so morally bankrupt that they prefer reprehensible and irredeemable candidates. The latter is probably true, but why would they say that and then continue to run for elections? Why do they want the approval of morally bankrupt people who prefer reprehensible candidates?

Another option is that voters are just very stupid and fail to see that which is "obvious", repeatedly, despite billions spent on trying to make them "see". Or perhaps their claims are not actually "obvious", and they ought to be... kinder to the other side.