revachol
https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/ODNI-3-November...
> CIA now joins DOE and FBI in assessing the more likely cause of the first human COVID-19 infection was a research-related incident.
> CIA has low confidence in this judgment
> Given CIA's low confidence, credible new intelligence reporting or open-source information could prompt CIA to change its assessment.
> Four agencies and the National Intelligence Council (NIC) continue to assess that natural contact with an animal infected with SARS-CoV-2—or a closely related progenitor virus—was the most likely cause of the first human COVID-19 infection.
It's interesting that the BND has higher confidence in its assessment but not sufficient to support your statement that the lab leak hypothesis has "been confirmed by agencies around the world"
In any case, I'd wager no non-Chinese intelligence agency has the evidence to ascertain COVID-19 origin one way or the other. Both the initial confidence in natural origin and now this new certainty in declaring the lab leak hypothesis a fact seem nonsensical to me.
> Yes — ((((()))))) is balanced.
> It has 6 opening ( and 6 closing ), and they’re properly nested.
Though it did work when using "Extensive Thinking". The model wrote a Python program to solve this.
> Almost balanced — ((((()))))) has 5 opening parentheses and 6 closing parentheses, so it has one extra ).
> A balanced version would be: ((((()))))
Testing a couple of different models without a harness such that no tool calls are possible would be interesting
> The bot (allegedly) did a better performance improvement than the maintainer.
But on a different issue. That comparison seems odd