Recently I asked Claude (Fable) to use multiple threads to speed up a computation that could take several seconds to run while the user was waiting. Instead, it found a way to start the computation earlier in the background while the user was doing other things, so that it would be finished by the time the user was ready.

You're clearly operating in bad faith, but just for the record: the General365 problems are very difficult as you can see from the examples at https://arxiv.org/html/2604.11778v1#A1. It's actually impressive that Gemini 3 Pro got 62%, and the strongest OpenAI and Anthropic models they tried were GPT-5.1 and Sonnet 4.5.

There is a real issue that housing is unreasonably expensive in many areas, which we could fix via the innovative strategy of not making it illegal to build housing.

Yes, and that's why we should have carbon taxes that better align what makes economic sense with what's environmentally beneficial.

This is an excellent summary of the sort of anti-tech thinking that I strongly disagree with. Caring about people with Alzheimer's is well and good, but what we actually want are vaccines and cures.

See "Machines of Loving Grace" by Dario Amodei: https://darioamodei.com/essay/machines-of-loving-grace.

It's almost all tribalism: the left is for it, so they're against it. They have a partially valid point that a lot of so-called environmentalists are anti-progress degrowthers, but the response should be to demonstrate that clean energy (including nuclear) is very good for growth. When conservatives do what they're supposed to and let market forces work, you see things like Texas producing more renewable energy than California.

Yes, as a product gradually improves there will always be many people for whom version X didn't work well for them and version X+1 does. It turns out that Opus 4.5 and GPT 5.1 were larger than average improvements that cross that threshold for a significant number of people.

My point is these things only get truly better in anecdotes. The ways in which they fail is yet to change.

If your claim is that there's no substantive difference between Sonnet 3.5 and Fable, then we live in very different worlds.

I'd be curious to see a version of the test where models are asked to give a probability that their answers are correct so we can see how calibrated they are.

By selling more tokens, which by all reasonable accounts are profitable on the margin.

A year ago Opus 4.1 was $75 per million tokens, and now Opus 4.8 is $25 and Fable is $50.

I generally agree, in the same sense that it's "fair" for the US and China to spy on each other. It's not a moral outrage, but it is something that the targets can and should try to prevent.

"If LLMs were human-like intelligences they would do X, but they don't". What is X?

In reality, they're more like very good search engines that output relevant snippets of text.

What are the "relevant snippets" that contained the solutions for the unit distance and Jacobian conjectures?