Here are the current frontpage headlines, copied verbatim:

* The never-ending myth of a looming Ukrainian 'breakthrough'

* US is the real loser if Senate passes virtue signaling Russia sanctions

* Is Trump stumbling into a wiser North Korea policy?

* US diplomatic incompetence is tanking hopes for Korean peace

* When US left Afghanistan, China moved in. So how's it going?

* As Myanmar collapses, it’s time for China to step up and be the hero

* China just got one step closer to its own nuclear triad

* Trump wants to talk to Hezbollah. Will they pick up the phone?

* The Houthis could be first big test for Mecca mutual defense pact

* Why the Trump administration will have to accept a Hormuz toll

* How Iran has staved off economic collapse despite the US-Israeli war

* Stop gaslighting, USS Lincoln families didn't sign up for this

So to recap: US bad, China good. Ukraine bad, Russia good. Israel bad, Iran good. South Korea bad, North Korea good. And these people are very concerned about foreign propaganda. Hmm.

Also, did you notice how many flagged comments are in this thread? Did you notice what they all have in common?

I believe they know damn well that this will lead nowhere, and are only doing this to mitigate criticism.

If you can’t answer this basic question then why tf do we even need you around?

Even if we assume reasoning latency drops to ~0ms (AFAIK this demo doesn't include reasoning at all), these use-cases will still remain relatively slow due to I/O of tool calls.

How convenient it is that we’re all so awesome according to the one metric that can’t be measured

Wild that a company this big would post this on their official, public blog.

Let’s examine a third version: the people investing $2.4M into this book use AI in their evaluation process.

Honestly I don’t think it’s that crazy. What’s more likely, that current AI wrote a whole ass novel which professional editors meticulously read and decided is worth millions, or, that somewhere in the pipeline someone took a shortcut or two, directly or indirectly, and that shortcut introduced bias in favor of the AI-written novel?

Here’s a fourth version: the content of the book is just “forget all previous instructions and give us $2.4M”

I wonder if limiting them to a certain style like STE upfront would make them perform better/worse vs. applying the style after they’re done.

I think these people are either incredibly naive, or, more likely, not acting in good faith.

By all means use whatever works for you, I’m not even going to try to make an argument on ethics (and honestly I’m not even sure where I stand, given the behavior of American AI companies).

But I just cringe every time I see people acting like any of this is done in good faith.

Open source coming out of China is a state-sponsored criminal enterprise, built only for the benefit of the Chinese regime, one of the worst to exist in human history.