So most look like that but I did include a few one-shot “build an app that solves this problem” and some qualitative design tasks and a tough algorithmic optimization one.

I have a benchmark to build a game engine from a set of written instructions. It's a little tricky. Opus 4.8 did it in 470k tokens at a cost of $1.29 vs Opus 5 in 179k tokens for $0.33. (Fable 5 did it in 245k for $0.95)

Though if you really want to cut costs, Tencent's Hy3 model also got it right and did it in 283k tokens for $0.03

I have a personal benchmark suite of 14 real, non-public tasks. Opus 5 and Fable tied on 10, Opus won on 3, and Fable won on 1. It's a really strong model.

OpenAI accused Deepseek of misappropriating trade secrets which could have serious penalties but seems like an awfully hard case to make.

Seems like we’d all be better off with a law that governs data sharing among AI companies, if that’s the policy goal.

The terms of service don't even necessarily matter here. OpenAI could cancel your account for almost any reason, or for no reason at all. They don't particularly need to cite a ToS violation just as a store owner doesn't need to point to a written policy to kick you out of their store.

If the underlying issue is that LLMs should be regulated as a public good, then lets have that discussion. If it's that the major AI companies are becoming too powerful and anti-competitive, let's talk serious anti-trust enforcement. Micro-managing business policies isn't going to work very well.

But barring the terms of service from forbidding distillation seems like a tough sell. OpenAI shouldn't be allowed to decide what types of customers it wants and doesn't want?

HN surely has some underage users. If they look at their analytics and tweak the interface to improve time on site, are they also intentionally creating a product that is addictive to children?