> Who remembers the story of an iphone 5 prototype left a bar.
That was the iPhone 4 actually which was special for having the first “retina” screen. It was in a case to make it look like a 3GS to be used for field testing. The journalists that got their hands on it and published about it before the announcement could not turn it on past I think the Apple logo and a message saying to return it to Apple (or maybe it was just completely off, my memory is fuzzy), but were able to confirm the pixel density via microscope and I remember it blowing everyone’s minds at the time.
> people were signing petitions for Apple to not hunt down but instead forgive the employee that made such a grave mistake
FWIW I asked about it when I worked at Apple and he was indeed not fired and I think may have even still been working there when I was there around 10 years ago (though don’t quote me on that last part, he may have left already and I’m misremembering).
He was apparently not fired or even really reprimanded since it was a genuine accident and he wasn’t the one that sold it to the press, but that did start a slew of new policies around accounting for work devices.
I had dev fused phones for open carry outside of the office while I worked there but had to register when I got them and when they were returned, which apparently didn’t used to be tracked so tightly until that incident according to my coworkers who had been there longer.
> The biggest significance of anyone at OpenAI calling it AGI is their contract with Microsoft, giving MSFT access to all their IP, is based around them having achieved AGI, but presumably they can't just declare that unilaterally.
>
>Maybe they see getting out of the Microsoft contract as necessary to IPO.
I don’t have a link handy, but they already loosened up that contract significantly earlier this year, surely because they planned to start claiming AGI to pump their IPO and didn’t want to be beholden to all of those commitments.
The irony I’ve always found in that statement is that while it’s true that the government can’t be trusted and is generally incompetent, it’s also true of private companies. So even though it’s a true statement at face value, it’s still not a good argument for privatization which is just trading one set of incompetent and corrupt people for another set of the same but with even less oversight.
If you live in the US sure. I live in a Latin American country where it’s legal to buy coca leaves (cocaine is illegal obviously, but the leaves aren’t and are commonly sold in health food stores of all places for tea).
From my experience using coding agents approximately 7 days per week for the past year and a half or so, we hit the top of the S curve about a year ago around Opus 4.5, and it’s mostly been harness and other tooling improvements since then with small percentage improvements coming from the actual models.
I was saying this already months before Fable dropped and thought from all the Mythos hype that maybe I was wrong…then Fable came out and was barely better than Opus 4.8.
Considering how many more parameters Fable is supposed to be than Opus, we seem to have hit a scaling limit at least with current transformer architecture considering how closely Fable and Opus benchmark and perform in practice.
Security concerns about supply chain attacks in the AUR (well known to be extremely insecure well before LLMs got popular) isn’t “killing” Arch let alone “killing Linux distributions”, plural.
I’m not sure how true this is, Opus 5 immediately used 2 subagents on the first task I gave it on Friday. In fact my first thought was how it was similar to Fable in that sense.
reply