thimabi

Apparently Google made it a point to train their models to output SVG, among other things, so that helps

> If we impeach the judges now, it just buys Lula even more seats in the court.

There’s a clear right-wing/centrist majority in Congress, so Lula’s Supreme Court nominations will not be that partisan.

Many Justices do need to be investigated and impeached, and it’s our job now to pressure congressmen in that regard, and then pressure again to make sure future nominees are much better.

I wouldn’t say deadlocked but the coalition between moderates and the left isn’t a given. There are many centrist parties who will likely alternate between supporting and opposing the government depending on the issue.

Once again, a clear anti-Bolsonaro vote from the majority of the electorate. Lula won because he got last-minute support from the moderates and even some right-wingers. It certainly does not feel like a victory of the left.

Now he will face a much bigger opposition in Congress and therefore will have to find a middle ground.

I expect his policies to move even further to the right. This might pave the way for his vice-president Alckmin, a historical right-winger, to run in the 2030 elections — likely against São Paulo’s governor Tarcísio de Freitas, also a right-winger and considered more moderate than the Bolsonaros despite being associated with them.

(reposting my own comment from a related thread)

Once again, a clear anti-Bolsonaro vote from the majority of the electorate. Lula won because he got last-minute support from the moderates and even some right-wingers. It certainly does not feel like a victory of the left.

Now he will face a much bigger opposition in Congress and therefore will have to find a middle ground.

I expect his policies to move even further to the right. This might pave the way for his vice-president Alckmin, a historical right-winger, to run in the 2030 elections — likely against São Paulo’s governor Tarcísio de Freitas, also a right-winger and considered more moderate than the Bolsonaros despite being associated with them.

The impression I have is that many Brazilian voters want their version of the American Dream — yet don’t realize that Brazilian society is much different from the American one and that Brazil won’t ever replicate the success of the US, regardless of a government’s policies.

Those are not mutually exclusive things. I actually sympathize with voting with your wallet.

Doesn’t use limits… on the first month only, actual limits will be disclosed later — most likely after they’ve found out how much people actually use this new feature.

It’s about time for some laws against unpredictable pricing like that.

But Meta until very recently offered its services mostly for free, on a gigantic scale, paid for by ads. Now OpenAI has subscription revenue, API revenue, and ads revenue too. The fact that OpenAI isn’t financially sustainable makes me think it hasn’t really mastered its business yet.

Perhaps we can envision a future in which we analyze Reddit data not according to all the positive things people say about a product, but according to the negative things being said.

Shilling can’t prevent dissatisfied customers from voicing their opinions in a properly moderated subreddit, and astroturfing to spread misinformation about a competitor makes companies much more vulnerable to litigation.

Not all tasks require frontier intelligence. If you’ve got an easy, but tedious workflow, Luna can be quite good at that.

It’s confusing indeed, but I like having many options, particularly considering that pricing can be wildly different depending on the model.

Maybe OpenAI can offer an "auto" mode for Codex on the subscriptions, while leaving the possibility of users manually overriding whatever model the router chooses. To me that would be the best of both worlds. The problem is building a competent model router.

You probably mean they are operating with 80% margins discounting training expenses, which will continue to be pretty high for the foreseeable future.

I wonder why doesn’t the Internet Archive require logging-in prior to accessing the Wayback Machine. It would probably help them distinguish humans from bots, at a very little cost to humans.

One of the things that stood out in your article was the high amount of negations or contrasts. This is one of the worst hallmarks of AI writing, because humans tend to write in a more straightforward way, without as many caveats.

My two cents: you should avoid using AI to “polish” what you wrote. At most, instruct it to correct grammar mistakes only, instead of rephrasing your words, changing your arguments, turning paragraphs into bullet lists, “improving” sentences to make them more idiomatic… Nowadays, many technical readers would rather read the occasional non-idiomatic prose than put up with the soulless writing style of AI.

The fact that your arguments will probably end up in an LLM’s training data makes me think they are not implausible at all

This tracks with what OpenAI has been saying about Astra: that it tends to do things in a certain way and it’s up to you to prompt it to change its style.

> Will be interesting to see if inference chips are here to stay

To me, the efficiency gains of inference chips are so significant that they are certainly here to stay — barring a revolution of sorts that leads to a world devoid of AI as we know it.

I add commands that constantly fall into this rabbit hole to AGENTS.md alongside an instruction for the agent to request escalation immediately instead of failing first then retrying out of the sandbox. It’s a hack, but it works.

What do you suggest for articulating the writing style that one wants from LLMs?

I’ve been experimenting with having LLMs write/update academic notebooks for me, and so far the best results I’ve gotten came from correcting their output and asking them what they’ve “learned” from my feedback.

I noticed the same thing. In the app, normal “Chat” threads are only available via a “Checking recent chats” window, while projects, GPTs, library… are completely absent.

The web version of ChatGPT is confusing too. Now it has separate “Chat” and “Work” tabs (what about a Codex tab?), and it shifts the burden on the user to know when to use one or the other. Note that using the “Work” tab means using Codex usage limits [^1], but that’s hidden away in the settings.

Also, apparently “GPT-5.6 Terra and GPT-5.6 Luna are not selectable in standard ChatGPT conversations” [^2] — so if you want to use these models, you must go to the Work tab or download the app.

I don’t understand why there is so much fragmentation in what was supposed to be a unified app. The way that it is now, it’s far from intuitive.

[^1]: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/20001275-chatgpt-work-an...

[^2]: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/20001354-gpt-56-in-chatg...

I’m interested in knowing how each of GPT 5.6’s variants fare in non-English writing/translation tasks.

GPT 5.5 has a tendency to write English calques and non-idiomatic prose in other languages. Although that can be somewhat tamed with detailed instructions and a corpus of confusing terms, the model’s output often reads like a literal translation rather than native prose. Since I notice these issues most clearly in languages I know well, it makes me reluctant to trust the model’s output in languages in which I’m less proficient.

Ironically, ChatGPT began as a simple text-generation tool, but much of its offerings and benchmarks now focus on coding and agentic workflows, while leaving behind what made it notable in the first place.

I wonder why they haven’t simply continued to rebrand Codex as a general-purpose tool. ChatGPT Work is a convoluted name and continues the trend of having separate brands for separate things, what runs counter to OpenAI’s purported goal of unifying every workflow into a single “superapp”.

Worse still: what happens when your workflow involves both coding and general knowledge work? Are you expected to switch apps, or switch settings? To me, it sounds very confusing and inefficient, and not at all what I was expecting.

In a few years Sony executives will be wondering why a portion of their consumer base decided to prioritize other forms of entertainment. I can speak for myself in that I’ve never upgraded past the PS3, and I feel no regrets about it.

I’ve been experiencing similar feelings. Working with LLMs often takes almost as much mental energy as working with people, but the payoff does not always scale in the same way.

I think we are still on the early days of LLMs. Right now, using them productively requires deliberate thought and an acute knowledge of their limitations. As the author says, it’s easy to get angry at a model, or to foolishly let it nudge you towards more code and more tests — even when that is suboptimal.

To a certain extent, models keep getting better and better at discerning our intentions and providing value. Yet I am not sure whether we will reach a point where using them successfully no longer causes the kind of fatigue that it does today.

Buying a camera or car is different from paying a subscription, right? Different expectations

Surely there should be a way to enable deep links with a fallback to Safari without needing Gmail to know what apps I’ve got installed

I got 68,900 words, with the vast majority of the errors being on the grandmaster level.

As a non-native English speaker, I found that result pretty good! Though being a native Portuguese speaker certainly helped me as many difficult words in English borrow from Latin, and in Portuguese the Latin influence is more pronounced.