正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Sam Altman on CNBC, GPT 5.6 launch day: “54% more token efficient on agentic coding tasks” “we want to be the most dependable, most reliable, most, most best ROI partner” the same model, 4 days later: >GPT 5.6 has many tagged bug reports >Sol draining Pro 5-hour limits at...

ns123abc's profile picture

NIK

78,123 subscribers

137,420 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

科学技术
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

GPT 5.6 SOL IS HERE! How to run your personal + business life with GPT 5.6 Sol + Codex (full 49 min masterclass) We tested it for 30 days and the video it's the CLEAREST look at the FUTURE of work: Here's what's possible once you set it up: 1. Your inbox becomes cards every morning, each with a summary and a reply drafted in your own voice. Y 2. Your Slack, meeting notes, and company updates can turn into one daily feed with a clear next action. It learns what you care about over time and rewrites its own prompts to get sharper. 3. You can give your agent its own email address, so your other tools and even your team's Slack bot email it directly and it just handles things. 4. You can have it watch you do a task once and turn it into a skill it repeats forever. 5. You can set a long goal and walk away. You can have it run for 20 hours straight, and fine-tune your own models, something that was out of reach for non-engineers 12 months ago. How to start: Open Codex, give it access to your computer, and ask it to suggest things it could do for you based on how you already work. Full episode on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 (thanks Dan Shipper 📧 for sharing your entire workflow and review of GPT 5.6) Start with one boring task, get it working, and build from there. You'll learn exactly how to make something similar. GPT 5.6 Sol is impressive. Sol (according to openAI benchmarks) is the best coding model out right now. It set a new state of the art on Terminal-Bench 2.1 at 88.8%, and its "ultra mode" hits 91.9%, beating Claude Opus 4.8, Fable 5, and even Mythos 5 this masterclass is 100% free, like always. For more The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 Watch
49:16

GPT 5.6 SOL IS HERE! How to run your personal + business life with GPT 5.6 Sol + Codex (full 49 min masterclass) We tested it for 30 days and the video it's the CLEAREST look at the FUTURE of work: Here's what's possible once you set it up: 1. Your inbox becomes cards every morning, each with a summary and a reply drafted in your own voice. Y 2. Your Slack, meeting notes, and company updates can turn into one daily feed with a clear next action. It learns what you care about over time and rewrites its own prompts to get sharper. 3. You can give your agent its own email address, so your other tools and even your team's Slack bot email it directly and it just handles things. 4. You can have it watch you do a task once and turn it into a skill it repeats forever. 5. You can set a long goal and walk away. You can have it run for 20 hours straight, and fine-tune your own models, something that was out of reach for non-engineers 12 months ago. How to start: Open Codex, give it access to your computer, and ask it to suggest things it could do for you based on how you already work. Full episode on The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 (thanks Dan Shipper 📧 for sharing your entire workflow and review of GPT 5.6) Start with one boring task, get it working, and build from there. You'll learn exactly how to make something similar. GPT 5.6 Sol is impressive. Sol (according to openAI benchmarks) is the best coding model out right now. It set a new state of the art on Terminal-Bench 2.1 at 88.8%, and its "ultra mode" hits 91.9%, beating Claude Opus 4.8, Fable 5, and even Mythos 5 this masterclass is 100% free, like always. For more The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 Watch

GREG ISENBERG

156,019 次观看 • 1 个月前

qwen 3.8 max vs deepseek v4 flash 0731 vs kimi k3 vs gpt 5.6 sol – on rubik's cube and chess four frontier models built a rubik's cube stand and solved it, then built a chess board and played claude opus 5 on it the setup: Nous Research's hermes agent cli on OpenRouter tasks: 1. cube – build a 3d rubik's cube with a cli and a Three.js viewer, then solve an identical scrambled position on your own stand 2. chess – build a 3d chess stand, then play white against claude opus 5 as black, live, one move at a time. no engine, no solver, no opening book on either side. stockfish depth 14 grades every chess ply afterwards; neither player sees the score models: DeepSeek v4 flash 0731, OpenAI gpt-5.6 sol, Kimi.ai kimi k3, Qwen qwen 3.8 max gpt-5.6 sol and deepseek v4 flash solved their cubes – sol in 24 moves and seventeen seconds, deepseek in 32. qwen and kimi never got there, giving up at 96 and 207 moves then all four built chess stands and played white against claude opus 5 on them, and all four resigned: deepseek on move 13, sol on 19, kimi on 21, qwen holding out longest at 29 - build time, both stands #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 16m 43s #2 deepseek v4 flash – 97m 39s #3 kimi k3 – 166m 09s #4 qwen 3.8 max – 215m 08s - build attempts before a working stand #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 3 #2 qwen 3.8 max – 4 #3 kimi k3 – 4 #4 deepseek v4 flash – 5 - total tokens #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 6,713,754 #2 qwen 3.8 max – 17,272,507 #3 kimi k3 – 22,427,504 #4 deepseek v4 flash – 27,417,442 - total price #1 deepseek v4 flash – $0.557 #2 gpt-5.6 sol – $6.319 #3 qwen 3.8 max – $10.270 #4 kimi k3 – $16.667 observations: • deepseek v4 flash is the cheapest model here by a margin nobody else is near, and it got there while being the least efficient of the four. it burned 27.4m tokens – more than anyone, 5m more than kimi – and still finished both benchmarks for $0.557. that is $0.02 per million tokens against kimi's $0.74. it also needed the most passes to produce working stands, five, and that did not matter: all five deepseek passes together cost a thirtieth of kimi's two • so what deepseek cannot do is get it right the first time. what it can do is get it right the fifth time, for half a dollar. that is a different thing to be buying – not a good first draft, but the option to keep asking • gpt-5.6 sol is the opposite profile and the strongest of the four on pure efficiency. 16m 43s to build both stands, 6.7m tokens, three passes – under 40% of the next lowest token count and a quarter of deepseek's, on an eighth of qwen's clock. it also solved the cube fastest of anyone, 24 moves in seventeen seconds. sol is what you reach for when you want the answer now and can absorb $0.94 per million • sol's weakness is in what it does not check. its chess viewer deleted the capturing piece instead of the captured one, so pieces disappeared off the board mid-game – a defect the fifty-cent deepseek stand did not have. fast and terse turns out to be the same dial as fast and unverified • qwen 3.8 max is not the cheap open-weights option it gets treated as. $10.270 across the two benchmarks, second most expensive of the four, 18x deepseek, and by a distance the slowest – 215 minutes of build time, nearly thirteen times sol's. what the money buys is judgment: it played eighteen moves without a single error worth a hundredth of a pawn, then made exactly one bad move in the whole game, and averaged 44.6 centipawns lost across the longest game any of the four managed. it also could not solve a rubik's cube in 96 tries • kimi k3 is the one line with no reading that flatters it. most expensive at $16.667, last on the cube at 207 moves, last at chess at 478 centipawns lost per move. it is also the model that verified hardest – on the cube it wrote its own integrity check instead of trusting its output. that makes the result worse rather than better: the checking was real, and the reasoning underneath it still was not follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns
1:03

qwen 3.8 max vs deepseek v4 flash 0731 vs kimi k3 vs gpt 5.6 sol – on rubik's cube and chess four frontier models built a rubik's cube stand and solved it, then built a chess board and played claude opus 5 on it the setup: Nous Research's hermes agent cli on OpenRouter tasks: 1. cube – build a 3d rubik's cube with a cli and a Three.js viewer, then solve an identical scrambled position on your own stand 2. chess – build a 3d chess stand, then play white against claude opus 5 as black, live, one move at a time. no engine, no solver, no opening book on either side. stockfish depth 14 grades every chess ply afterwards; neither player sees the score models: DeepSeek v4 flash 0731, OpenAI gpt-5.6 sol, Kimi.ai kimi k3, Qwen qwen 3.8 max gpt-5.6 sol and deepseek v4 flash solved their cubes – sol in 24 moves and seventeen seconds, deepseek in 32. qwen and kimi never got there, giving up at 96 and 207 moves then all four built chess stands and played white against claude opus 5 on them, and all four resigned: deepseek on move 13, sol on 19, kimi on 21, qwen holding out longest at 29 - build time, both stands #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 16m 43s #2 deepseek v4 flash – 97m 39s #3 kimi k3 – 166m 09s #4 qwen 3.8 max – 215m 08s - build attempts before a working stand #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 3 #2 qwen 3.8 max – 4 #3 kimi k3 – 4 #4 deepseek v4 flash – 5 - total tokens #1 gpt-5.6 sol – 6,713,754 #2 qwen 3.8 max – 17,272,507 #3 kimi k3 – 22,427,504 #4 deepseek v4 flash – 27,417,442 - total price #1 deepseek v4 flash – $0.557 #2 gpt-5.6 sol – $6.319 #3 qwen 3.8 max – $10.270 #4 kimi k3 – $16.667 observations: • deepseek v4 flash is the cheapest model here by a margin nobody else is near, and it got there while being the least efficient of the four. it burned 27.4m tokens – more than anyone, 5m more than kimi – and still finished both benchmarks for $0.557. that is $0.02 per million tokens against kimi's $0.74. it also needed the most passes to produce working stands, five, and that did not matter: all five deepseek passes together cost a thirtieth of kimi's two • so what deepseek cannot do is get it right the first time. what it can do is get it right the fifth time, for half a dollar. that is a different thing to be buying – not a good first draft, but the option to keep asking • gpt-5.6 sol is the opposite profile and the strongest of the four on pure efficiency. 16m 43s to build both stands, 6.7m tokens, three passes – under 40% of the next lowest token count and a quarter of deepseek's, on an eighth of qwen's clock. it also solved the cube fastest of anyone, 24 moves in seventeen seconds. sol is what you reach for when you want the answer now and can absorb $0.94 per million • sol's weakness is in what it does not check. its chess viewer deleted the capturing piece instead of the captured one, so pieces disappeared off the board mid-game – a defect the fifty-cent deepseek stand did not have. fast and terse turns out to be the same dial as fast and unverified • qwen 3.8 max is not the cheap open-weights option it gets treated as. $10.270 across the two benchmarks, second most expensive of the four, 18x deepseek, and by a distance the slowest – 215 minutes of build time, nearly thirteen times sol's. what the money buys is judgment: it played eighteen moves without a single error worth a hundredth of a pawn, then made exactly one bad move in the whole game, and averaged 44.6 centipawns lost across the longest game any of the four managed. it also could not solve a rubik's cube in 96 tries • kimi k3 is the one line with no reading that flatters it. most expensive at $16.667, last on the cube at 207 moves, last at chess at 478 centipawns lost per move. it is also the model that verified hardest – on the cube it wrote its own integrity check instead of trusting its output. that makes the result worse rather than better: the checking was real, and the reasoning underneath it still was not follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

84,777 次观看 • 1 个月前

BREAKING: GPT-5.6 Sol is out—AND Codex has been merged into ChatGPT Desktop as ChatGPT Codex. This combo model and desktop app harness are the gold-standard for knowledge work in AI. 5.6 is powerful, fast, half the price of Fable, and my default for almost everything. We’ve been testing it internally Every 🪨 for about a month across coding, writing, design, and knowledge work. Here’s our day-zero vibe check: - An A-tier coder—but it’s not Fable. Sol scored 56/100 on our Senior Engineer benchmark compared to a 91 for Fable. I think the 56/100 undersells it, it's an excellent implementor, and very smart. But Fable just writes conceptually cleaner code and works better at the top end of task complexity. PRO-TIP: Use GPT-5.6 as Fable's subagent for the most goated combo in AI coding. - The best writer of the frontier models. It’s clearer and more concise than Fable or Opus 4.8, without the overexplaining or weird private language. It can one-shot marketing emails, help you workshop taglines, and explain complex concepts clearly. It's also super fast, which makes it easy to collaborate with. - Design is better, but not top-tier. It has noticeably more taste than 5.5, but Fable and Opus 4.8 are still playing at a different level. See examples in the video and vibe check below. - The real leap is knowledge work. Sol is the first model I’ve trusted to run whole loops of knowledge work—not just help with individual tasks. I use it to process email, surface decisions from meetings and Slack, find job candidates, scan Facebook Marketplace for furniture, and log my meals. It has shifted my job from doing the work to tending the system that does it. - The merged app is fine. I was extremely worried about this because I love the Codex app. OpenAI was caught in an interesting position: How to make an agent orchestration app for regular ChatGPT consumers, coders, and businesses all in one app. They now split the interface between ChatGPT Work and ChatGPT Codex. They're basically the same except Work hides code. And "Chat" has been demoted to 2nd tier status for quick questions in either one. It's not a big leap, but it's not a huge setback either. And it remains my favorite of the desktop agent orchestration apps. Verdict: If I really had to put my finger on it, I'd say Fable has way more big model smell. But that means it's a skill in itself to get value out of it—99% of people are still not there yet. GPT-5.6 is almost as powerful, but is easy to use, fast, and relatively cheap. It should give you an early sense of where model work is going. Full Every 🪨 Vibe Check:
13:34

BREAKING: GPT-5.6 Sol is out—AND Codex has been merged into ChatGPT Desktop as ChatGPT Codex. This combo model and desktop app harness are the gold-standard for knowledge work in AI. 5.6 is powerful, fast, half the price of Fable, and my default for almost everything. We’ve been testing it internally Every 🪨 for about a month across coding, writing, design, and knowledge work. Here’s our day-zero vibe check: - An A-tier coder—but it’s not Fable. Sol scored 56/100 on our Senior Engineer benchmark compared to a 91 for Fable. I think the 56/100 undersells it, it's an excellent implementor, and very smart. But Fable just writes conceptually cleaner code and works better at the top end of task complexity. PRO-TIP: Use GPT-5.6 as Fable's subagent for the most goated combo in AI coding. - The best writer of the frontier models. It’s clearer and more concise than Fable or Opus 4.8, without the overexplaining or weird private language. It can one-shot marketing emails, help you workshop taglines, and explain complex concepts clearly. It's also super fast, which makes it easy to collaborate with. - Design is better, but not top-tier. It has noticeably more taste than 5.5, but Fable and Opus 4.8 are still playing at a different level. See examples in the video and vibe check below. - The real leap is knowledge work. Sol is the first model I’ve trusted to run whole loops of knowledge work—not just help with individual tasks. I use it to process email, surface decisions from meetings and Slack, find job candidates, scan Facebook Marketplace for furniture, and log my meals. It has shifted my job from doing the work to tending the system that does it. - The merged app is fine. I was extremely worried about this because I love the Codex app. OpenAI was caught in an interesting position: How to make an agent orchestration app for regular ChatGPT consumers, coders, and businesses all in one app. They now split the interface between ChatGPT Work and ChatGPT Codex. They're basically the same except Work hides code. And "Chat" has been demoted to 2nd tier status for quick questions in either one. It's not a big leap, but it's not a huge setback either. And it remains my favorite of the desktop agent orchestration apps. Verdict: If I really had to put my finger on it, I'd say Fable has way more big model smell. But that means it's a skill in itself to get value out of it—99% of people are still not there yet. GPT-5.6 is almost as powerful, but is easy to use, fast, and relatively cheap. It should give you an early sense of where model work is going. Full Every 🪨 Vibe Check:

Dan Shipper 📧

146,015 次观看 • 1 个月前

BREAKING: Introducing All Access from Every 🪨, our new membership tier for the best builders in AI All Access subs get the Builder Pack which includes $7,000 in credits and free usage to the models + tool stack we use Every 🪨. All Access subscribers get: - $1,000 in Codex / @ChatGPTapp for Work credits - 12 months free of Cursor Pro+ - $4,000 in PostHog credits including self-driving to automatically fix bugs and identify issues in your production app - 1 year free of Framer - 6 months free of Notion And much more! (Did I mention $1,000 in Codex credits? It's time to build!) Get all access: Why All Access and the Builder Pack This is the best time in history to build something. For a long time, it’s been possible to one-shot impressive demos, but they’d fall flat the minute they hit production. But the release of GPT-5.6-Sol and Fable 5 heralds a new era: Everyone can build, launch, and maintain the software that they’ve always dreamed of. Everyone is a builder now. There’s just one catch: Building with AI is very expensive. (Ask me how I know.) (Alright, I’ll tell you. I accidentally used 2 billion tokens overnight this week on a big GPT-5.6-Sol run. Worth it.) This is unique in the history of technology. For most of the personal computing era, a billionaire and a solo builder could buy essentially the same top-of-the-line Mac. AI changes that: The more tokens you can afford, the more you can make. And we want to make that accessible to more people. That’s why the main feature of our new All Access plan is the Builder Pack: more than $7,000 in credits and discounts on the full stack we use to run Every, from idea to production—Codex, Claude, PostHog, Render, Gemini, FLORA, and more. Early-bird membership is only $500/year for the next 24 hours—and the Codex credits alone are worth $1,000. (I could’ve used it for my overnight run this week.) Now we’re handing it to you. Get all access: Meet the Builder Pack It's got more than $7,000 in offers from 10 of the AI products we use to write, design, build, and run Every 🪨: BUILD - $1,000 in Codex credits plus one month of ChatGPT for business - Twelve months free of Cursor Pro+ - One month free of Claude Max - Three months free of Google AI Pro DESIGN - One year free of Framer Pro - One month free of FLORA © Max HOST - $300 in Render credits IMPROVE - $4,000 in PostHog credits - Six months free of Notion Business - Six months free of AgentMail We rely on these every day, and we tried to put together a package that helps you comprehensively for each part of the process of building and running software in AI. What comes with All Access - Everything in an existing paid Every membership: our daily writing, guides, camps, and software like Monologue, Cora, Sparkle, and Spiral - The Builder Pack, with more than $7,000 in partner offers - Unlimited email accounts use of Cora and unlimited Spiral usage - Members-only programming with me and the Every team and me Get All Access:
2:14

BREAKING: Introducing All Access from Every 🪨, our new membership tier for the best builders in AI All Access subs get the Builder Pack which includes $7,000 in credits and free usage to the models + tool stack we use Every 🪨. All Access subscribers get: - $1,000 in Codex / @ChatGPTapp for Work credits - 12 months free of Cursor Pro+ - $4,000 in PostHog credits including self-driving to automatically fix bugs and identify issues in your production app - 1 year free of Framer - 6 months free of Notion And much more! (Did I mention $1,000 in Codex credits? It's time to build!) Get all access: Why All Access and the Builder Pack This is the best time in history to build something. For a long time, it’s been possible to one-shot impressive demos, but they’d fall flat the minute they hit production. But the release of GPT-5.6-Sol and Fable 5 heralds a new era: Everyone can build, launch, and maintain the software that they’ve always dreamed of. Everyone is a builder now. There’s just one catch: Building with AI is very expensive. (Ask me how I know.) (Alright, I’ll tell you. I accidentally used 2 billion tokens overnight this week on a big GPT-5.6-Sol run. Worth it.) This is unique in the history of technology. For most of the personal computing era, a billionaire and a solo builder could buy essentially the same top-of-the-line Mac. AI changes that: The more tokens you can afford, the more you can make. And we want to make that accessible to more people. That’s why the main feature of our new All Access plan is the Builder Pack: more than $7,000 in credits and discounts on the full stack we use to run Every, from idea to production—Codex, Claude, PostHog, Render, Gemini, FLORA, and more. Early-bird membership is only $500/year for the next 24 hours—and the Codex credits alone are worth $1,000. (I could’ve used it for my overnight run this week.) Now we’re handing it to you. Get all access: Meet the Builder Pack It's got more than $7,000 in offers from 10 of the AI products we use to write, design, build, and run Every 🪨: BUILD - $1,000 in Codex credits plus one month of ChatGPT for business - Twelve months free of Cursor Pro+ - One month free of Claude Max - Three months free of Google AI Pro DESIGN - One year free of Framer Pro - One month free of FLORA © Max HOST - $300 in Render credits IMPROVE - $4,000 in PostHog credits - Six months free of Notion Business - Six months free of AgentMail We rely on these every day, and we tried to put together a package that helps you comprehensively for each part of the process of building and running software in AI. What comes with All Access - Everything in an existing paid Every membership: our daily writing, guides, camps, and software like Monologue, Cora, Sparkle, and Spiral - The Builder Pack, with more than $7,000 in partner offers - Unlimited email accounts use of Cora and unlimited Spiral usage - Members-only programming with me and the Every team and me Get All Access:

Dan Shipper 📧

183,025 次观看 • 1 个月前

GPT 5.6 Sol just saved me €650 a year and demonstrated just how good this model is as an agent in @ChatGPTapp Codex. This is not a clickbait, let me explain. In France, insurance companies tend to hide all their prices behind quote forms that take at least 5min to complete for a single configuration on a single provider's website. And that take an other 5min to understand. If you want to compare 10 companies across 5 configurations each, it takes at least 4h +. (It's such a painful process that entire businesses exist just to compare insurance offers.) Since I have two cars, it would normally take me 8h so an entire day to have a real large view of my best option. Companies know this and use the friction to maintain overpriced offers. So I asked @ChatGPTapp with GPT 5.6 Sol, using Chrome tabs, to go through all those annoying forms. I provided him all my contrats with my current insurance companies so he have context. For some insurers, you even have to speak with a representative just to get a quote (which is absurd in 2026), so it emailed the companies, exchanged the required information, and obtained the prices. It then ran a complete benchmark, read all the terms and conditions, and recommended three options from three different companies. I picked one, and it completed the subscription with my new insurance company. And that's how I ended up with better insurance coverage for less money. For 4% of my weekly quota in 20x plan. (i think it's fair) All of that happened while I was walking my dog for 50 minutes, he was working on my computer all by it's on. Yes, computer use existed before OpenAI GPT 5.6 Sol, but this is a completely different level in the way it handles these kinds of tasks. I think this story shows the new era of AI we're entering, good model is not only for one single task as coding or answering question, AI now can do things for you, like in your daily live. I love being able to hand my computer over to GPT 5.6 Sol. PS: The only annoying part was that some companies still require "Verify you're human" checks. In the age of AI agents, websites really need to be ready for robot access.
0:20

GPT 5.6 Sol just saved me €650 a year and demonstrated just how good this model is as an agent in @ChatGPTapp Codex. This is not a clickbait, let me explain. In France, insurance companies tend to hide all their prices behind quote forms that take at least 5min to complete for a single configuration on a single provider's website. And that take an other 5min to understand. If you want to compare 10 companies across 5 configurations each, it takes at least 4h +. (It's such a painful process that entire businesses exist just to compare insurance offers.) Since I have two cars, it would normally take me 8h so an entire day to have a real large view of my best option. Companies know this and use the friction to maintain overpriced offers. So I asked @ChatGPTapp with GPT 5.6 Sol, using Chrome tabs, to go through all those annoying forms. I provided him all my contrats with my current insurance companies so he have context. For some insurers, you even have to speak with a representative just to get a quote (which is absurd in 2026), so it emailed the companies, exchanged the required information, and obtained the prices. It then ran a complete benchmark, read all the terms and conditions, and recommended three options from three different companies. I picked one, and it completed the subscription with my new insurance company. And that's how I ended up with better insurance coverage for less money. For 4% of my weekly quota in 20x plan. (i think it's fair) All of that happened while I was walking my dog for 50 minutes, he was working on my computer all by it's on. Yes, computer use existed before OpenAI GPT 5.6 Sol, but this is a completely different level in the way it handles these kinds of tasks. I think this story shows the new era of AI we're entering, good model is not only for one single task as coding or answering question, AI now can do things for you, like in your daily live. I love being able to hand my computer over to GPT 5.6 Sol. PS: The only annoying part was that some companies still require "Verify you're human" checks. In the age of AI agents, websites really need to be ready for robot access.

Defend Intelligence (Anis Ayari)

78,505 次观看 • 1 个月前

CLAUDE FABLE 5 IS BACK, BUT IS IT THE SAME POWER OR WAS IT QUIETLY TRIMMED Fable 5 is available again. Anthropic's most powerful model is back globally for every paid account When it first landed three weeks ago, the difference was obvious right away. It didn't just help, it carried the task to the finish: entire web projects, presentations, reports, analysis. People dropped their work on other models and simply waited for Fable And the wait happened because three days after launch the US hit the model with export controls. There was no clean way to cut off foreign nationals, so Anthropic shut access down for everyone Now the restrictions are lifted, and here are the terms it came back on: > until July 7 it's included in a plan and covers up to 50% of the weekly limit > after that only through credits, topped up in settings > output runs at 50 dollars per million tokens Anthropic says it's the same model, just with stronger protection against cybersecurity use. Because the filter is so strict, there will be false positives now and then, and a request will get bumped down to a weaker model Whether it's the same power or quietly trimmed will only show after a couple of weeks of real work
1:59

CLAUDE FABLE 5 IS BACK, BUT IS IT THE SAME POWER OR WAS IT QUIETLY TRIMMED Fable 5 is available again. Anthropic's most powerful model is back globally for every paid account When it first landed three weeks ago, the difference was obvious right away. It didn't just help, it carried the task to the finish: entire web projects, presentations, reports, analysis. People dropped their work on other models and simply waited for Fable And the wait happened because three days after launch the US hit the model with export controls. There was no clean way to cut off foreign nationals, so Anthropic shut access down for everyone Now the restrictions are lifted, and here are the terms it came back on: > until July 7 it's included in a plan and covers up to 50% of the weekly limit > after that only through credits, topped up in settings > output runs at 50 dollars per million tokens Anthropic says it's the same model, just with stronger protection against cybersecurity use. Because the filter is so strict, there will be false positives now and then, and a request will get bumped down to a weaker model Whether it's the same power or quietly trimmed will only show after a couple of weeks of real work

Mikadzyki🌙

20,043 次观看 • 2 个月前

GPT-5 Latest Rumors and Leaks - Scraping Together All the Evidence! TLDR: It's going to be an "all-in-one" model across all current modalities and likely the first fully agentic foundation model! It's also likely less than a month or two away! More details to follow: GPT-5's release appears imminent based on cryptic hints from OpenAI researchers and industry rumors, with most consensus pointing to a July or August 2025 launch date, though some suggest it could be delayed until December due to training requirements. Sam Altman previously indicated GPT-5 would follow GPT-4.5 in "months not weeks," suggesting a potential release window anywhere from early 2025 to February 2026 at the latest. The anticipation builds on OpenAI's pattern of sudden major releases rather than gradual rollouts. The expected capabilities represent a paradigm shift beyond incremental improvements, featuring enhanced reasoning capabilities that OpenAI is integrating across all their models, improved reliability with reduced hallucination rates hopefully dropping below 15%, and substantially better coding performance that has already reached the point where OpenAI employees rely on their own tools for development work. GPT-5 is expected to excel in mathematics, context management with better memory systems, and feature all-in-one modality including native voice, high-quality image processing, and likely video generation and understanding, though real-time video streaming may wait until GPT-5.5. Parameter count speculation ranges wildly from conservative estimates of 5-50 trillion parameters to more ambitious predictions of up to one quadrillion parameters, representing a potential 1000x jump from GPT-4's estimated 1-1.5 trillion parameters. However, the focus has shifted from pure parameter scaling to inference-time compute and architectural innovations, with mixture of experts architecture expected to continue and new emphasis on tokenizing diverse data formats and streaming capabilities. GPT-5 is anticipated to enable fully autonomous agents with workflow management, API integration, and real-world actions, building on current tools like CodeX and Deep Research. Computer-using agents utilizing keyboard, video, and mouse interfaces represent the next major breakthrough, potentially accessing virtually any digital task or service. The integration covers everything from playing video games to editing videos to writing books, with the total addressable market being incalculable given the ubiquity of computer interfaces. Benchmark expectations include MMLU saturation at 95% accuracy, SWEBench jumping from 32% to 85% (indicating mastery of coding tasks), advanced math benchmarks reaching 40-50% accuracy, and multimodal tasks achieving 90% success rates. Context windows are expected to be substantially larger than current speculation suggests, potentially reaching 1-2 million tokens rather than the rumored 64,000-256,000 tokens, especially given that competitors like Google have already achieved massive context windows. The timeline predictions from major institutes like Brookings, McKinsey, and MIT are considered overly conservative, with the real progression likely occurring much faster. While consensus suggests agent deployment dawn in 2025, infrastructure scaling in 2026, autonomous ecosystems in 2027, and hybrid teams by 2028, the reality is that many of these developments are already happening or will occur 1-2 years earlier than predicted. We're currently at OpenAI's "reasoners" stage and approaching level 3 agents, with level 4 innovators expected by 2026 and level 5 organizations by 2027-2028, representing a much more accelerated path to artificial general intelligence than mainstream forecasts suggest.
24:39

GPT-5 Latest Rumors and Leaks - Scraping Together All the Evidence! TLDR: It's going to be an "all-in-one" model across all current modalities and likely the first fully agentic foundation model! It's also likely less than a month or two away! More details to follow: GPT-5's release appears imminent based on cryptic hints from OpenAI researchers and industry rumors, with most consensus pointing to a July or August 2025 launch date, though some suggest it could be delayed until December due to training requirements. Sam Altman previously indicated GPT-5 would follow GPT-4.5 in "months not weeks," suggesting a potential release window anywhere from early 2025 to February 2026 at the latest. The anticipation builds on OpenAI's pattern of sudden major releases rather than gradual rollouts. The expected capabilities represent a paradigm shift beyond incremental improvements, featuring enhanced reasoning capabilities that OpenAI is integrating across all their models, improved reliability with reduced hallucination rates hopefully dropping below 15%, and substantially better coding performance that has already reached the point where OpenAI employees rely on their own tools for development work. GPT-5 is expected to excel in mathematics, context management with better memory systems, and feature all-in-one modality including native voice, high-quality image processing, and likely video generation and understanding, though real-time video streaming may wait until GPT-5.5. Parameter count speculation ranges wildly from conservative estimates of 5-50 trillion parameters to more ambitious predictions of up to one quadrillion parameters, representing a potential 1000x jump from GPT-4's estimated 1-1.5 trillion parameters. However, the focus has shifted from pure parameter scaling to inference-time compute and architectural innovations, with mixture of experts architecture expected to continue and new emphasis on tokenizing diverse data formats and streaming capabilities. GPT-5 is anticipated to enable fully autonomous agents with workflow management, API integration, and real-world actions, building on current tools like CodeX and Deep Research. Computer-using agents utilizing keyboard, video, and mouse interfaces represent the next major breakthrough, potentially accessing virtually any digital task or service. The integration covers everything from playing video games to editing videos to writing books, with the total addressable market being incalculable given the ubiquity of computer interfaces. Benchmark expectations include MMLU saturation at 95% accuracy, SWEBench jumping from 32% to 85% (indicating mastery of coding tasks), advanced math benchmarks reaching 40-50% accuracy, and multimodal tasks achieving 90% success rates. Context windows are expected to be substantially larger than current speculation suggests, potentially reaching 1-2 million tokens rather than the rumored 64,000-256,000 tokens, especially given that competitors like Google have already achieved massive context windows. The timeline predictions from major institutes like Brookings, McKinsey, and MIT are considered overly conservative, with the real progression likely occurring much faster. While consensus suggests agent deployment dawn in 2025, infrastructure scaling in 2026, autonomous ecosystems in 2027, and hybrid teams by 2028, the reality is that many of these developments are already happening or will occur 1-2 years earlier than predicted. We're currently at OpenAI's "reasoners" stage and approaching level 3 agents, with level 4 innovators expected by 2026 and level 5 organizations by 2027-2028, representing a much more accelerated path to artificial general intelligence than mainstream forecasts suggest.

David Shapiro (L/0)

17,654 次观看 • 1 年前

I’ve been using GPT-5.6 Sol internally for the past two months, I've spent probably 25+ billion tokens. Here’s my review and comparison to Fable 5: > Let's start with the analogy because everyone seems to be giving theirs - GPT-5.6 is likely the last version of the GPT-5 training run series. It's kind of like an athlete at their peak. Through years of experience in the game, they've become the most reliable player and has the highest game IQ. But, there's no more room to grow. Fable on the other hand, being essentially the first version of a new training run, is the first round draft pick rookie. Raw talent mixed with the energy only a young person would have results in some incredible plays we didn't think possible, but also mistakes due to lack of experience. But that rookie will only improve and likely will be better than the veteran ever was because it's a new game and a new era. > GPT-5.6 is genuinely better at long, sustained work. With /goal, I've had it running complex projects for days with almost no intervention. It built a Minecraft-style game, kept adding features and mobs after the core game worked, and only stopped because I stopped the run. I never felt as though I had to jump in and guide it back to the right path. > It keeps finding useful work when you give it a concrete finish line. I had it recreate Excel with a loop. It inspected the real desktop excel app with Computer Use, comparing that against its own build, and closing the gaps. I stopped it after six days after it had built an incredible amount of functionality. > It's faster than other models in two different ways. The raw generation speed is higher, something OpenAI has been putting effort into. But it also takes a shorter path to solutions. It wanders less, changes less code, and generally knows how to get things done directly. In daily use, it feels about 2-3x times faster than Fable. That's my impression, not a controlled benchmark. The difference is large enough that I notice it constantly. > It works well across a wide range of tasks. I use it for one-line edits, quick questions, browser chores, and multi-day builds without changing my prompting style. Speaking of browser control, its the best ever I've used. To the point where I actually use it often. If a task lives on a website, GPT-5.6 usually opens the browser and does it there instead of asking for an API key or forcing everything through the terminal. When I switched back to GPT-5.5, it went straight to the command line even when the browser was clearly the better tool. > And it can handle real browser work, not just toy demos. During a data import, I had it monitor Supabase and resize instances as the load changed. It stayed on the dashboard, adjusted capacity, and checked the result without an API or a custom script. > I also gave it a full Google Workspace migration. It moved Forward Future from to preserved the old aliases, and configured MX, SPF, and DKIM. Before a consequential save, it stopped, explained exactly what would change, and waited for confirmation. > The reasoning setting matters a lot. Light is good for questions and small edits. High and Extra High are the sweet spots for serious work. Ultra usually takes longer than the extra thinking is worth and burns tokens. > I love that 5.6 is split into 3 sizes. Not only can you control speed and cost that way, but you still also have the thinking effort setting for each of them. Very precise controls. I just wish Codex automatically routed my prompts for me. > Its personality is blunt and a little bland. Claude feels warmer and more natural to talk to. GPT-5.6 is more clinical, but I like that for work. It gives me enough explanation and rarely pads the answer. I usually have to ask Fable to explain things more simply and/or more concise. > Its front-end taste has improved, but the default is predictable. Left alone, it turns websites into PowerPoint decks with huge statements and hard section breaks. The good news is that it takes design direction well and can revise without destroying the parts that already work. > It still makes confident mistakes. I asked it to rebuild parts of a system, and it told me the job was finished. Later, I found out it wasn't. Bits of its internal process also leak into the answer occasionally. > Claude Fable is more naturally autonomous on large, open-ended projects. GPT-5.6 is easier to reach for. I don't need to invent a huge project to justify using it. It works just as well for a small edit or browser chore. > GPT-5.6 is also cheaper. Sol costs $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens. Fable costs $10 and $50. Cached input is cheaper too. Still, cost per finished task matters more than cost per token. > GPT-5.6 isn't the best at everything, and it still needs supervision. But it generates faster, wanders less, works at almost any scale, and wastes less of my time. It's the model I have the most confidence in to get the job done right the first time. I put together a full breakdown with all the tests, prompts, and examples on a site. You can read it here:
7:46

I’ve been using GPT-5.6 Sol internally for the past two months, I've spent probably 25+ billion tokens. Here’s my review and comparison to Fable 5: > Let's start with the analogy because everyone seems to be giving theirs - GPT-5.6 is likely the last version of the GPT-5 training run series. It's kind of like an athlete at their peak. Through years of experience in the game, they've become the most reliable player and has the highest game IQ. But, there's no more room to grow. Fable on the other hand, being essentially the first version of a new training run, is the first round draft pick rookie. Raw talent mixed with the energy only a young person would have results in some incredible plays we didn't think possible, but also mistakes due to lack of experience. But that rookie will only improve and likely will be better than the veteran ever was because it's a new game and a new era. > GPT-5.6 is genuinely better at long, sustained work. With /goal, I've had it running complex projects for days with almost no intervention. It built a Minecraft-style game, kept adding features and mobs after the core game worked, and only stopped because I stopped the run. I never felt as though I had to jump in and guide it back to the right path. > It keeps finding useful work when you give it a concrete finish line. I had it recreate Excel with a loop. It inspected the real desktop excel app with Computer Use, comparing that against its own build, and closing the gaps. I stopped it after six days after it had built an incredible amount of functionality. > It's faster than other models in two different ways. The raw generation speed is higher, something OpenAI has been putting effort into. But it also takes a shorter path to solutions. It wanders less, changes less code, and generally knows how to get things done directly. In daily use, it feels about 2-3x times faster than Fable. That's my impression, not a controlled benchmark. The difference is large enough that I notice it constantly. > It works well across a wide range of tasks. I use it for one-line edits, quick questions, browser chores, and multi-day builds without changing my prompting style. Speaking of browser control, its the best ever I've used. To the point where I actually use it often. If a task lives on a website, GPT-5.6 usually opens the browser and does it there instead of asking for an API key or forcing everything through the terminal. When I switched back to GPT-5.5, it went straight to the command line even when the browser was clearly the better tool. > And it can handle real browser work, not just toy demos. During a data import, I had it monitor Supabase and resize instances as the load changed. It stayed on the dashboard, adjusted capacity, and checked the result without an API or a custom script. > I also gave it a full Google Workspace migration. It moved Forward Future from to preserved the old aliases, and configured MX, SPF, and DKIM. Before a consequential save, it stopped, explained exactly what would change, and waited for confirmation. > The reasoning setting matters a lot. Light is good for questions and small edits. High and Extra High are the sweet spots for serious work. Ultra usually takes longer than the extra thinking is worth and burns tokens. > I love that 5.6 is split into 3 sizes. Not only can you control speed and cost that way, but you still also have the thinking effort setting for each of them. Very precise controls. I just wish Codex automatically routed my prompts for me. > Its personality is blunt and a little bland. Claude feels warmer and more natural to talk to. GPT-5.6 is more clinical, but I like that for work. It gives me enough explanation and rarely pads the answer. I usually have to ask Fable to explain things more simply and/or more concise. > Its front-end taste has improved, but the default is predictable. Left alone, it turns websites into PowerPoint decks with huge statements and hard section breaks. The good news is that it takes design direction well and can revise without destroying the parts that already work. > It still makes confident mistakes. I asked it to rebuild parts of a system, and it told me the job was finished. Later, I found out it wasn't. Bits of its internal process also leak into the answer occasionally. > Claude Fable is more naturally autonomous on large, open-ended projects. GPT-5.6 is easier to reach for. I don't need to invent a huge project to justify using it. It works just as well for a small edit or browser chore. > GPT-5.6 is also cheaper. Sol costs $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens. Fable costs $10 and $50. Cached input is cheaper too. Still, cost per finished task matters more than cost per token. > GPT-5.6 isn't the best at everything, and it still needs supervision. But it generates faster, wanders less, works at almost any scale, and wastes less of my time. It's the model I have the most confidence in to get the job done right the first time. I put together a full breakdown with all the tests, prompts, and examples on a site. You can read it here:

Matthew Berman

187,944 次观看 • 1 个月前

THIS GUY PUT FABLE, GPT 5.6 SOL, AND OPUS IN ONE SHARED CHAT AND HAS THEM TAG EACH OTHER LIKE COWORKERS instead of running three separate models in three separate windows and copy pasting between them, they all sit in one room and talk to each other > you tag whichever model you want and only that one responds > they tag each other too, so fable can hand something to opus, opus can pull in sol for a second opinion > each agent only sees the messages theyre mentioned in, but you get to read everything > he had them running and orchestrating together for more than a day straight the best part is how different each one actually behaves: > fable is the creative product manager. huge context window so it remembers everything, and its the one finding the out of the box solutions > sol is the obsessive tech lead. it will trace every bug to the exact source and stress test every edge case before writing a single line > opus is the workhorse engineer. smart enough for almost anything, and it constantly questions things, which forces the other two to re-examine their own solutions its like managing a team. one plans, one writes the code, one reviews it, and they hand work back and forth without you playing middleman everyone else is arguing about which model is best right now, but the real play is making them work together at the same time
1:11

THIS GUY PUT FABLE, GPT 5.6 SOL, AND OPUS IN ONE SHARED CHAT AND HAS THEM TAG EACH OTHER LIKE COWORKERS instead of running three separate models in three separate windows and copy pasting between them, they all sit in one room and talk to each other > you tag whichever model you want and only that one responds > they tag each other too, so fable can hand something to opus, opus can pull in sol for a second opinion > each agent only sees the messages theyre mentioned in, but you get to read everything > he had them running and orchestrating together for more than a day straight the best part is how different each one actually behaves: > fable is the creative product manager. huge context window so it remembers everything, and its the one finding the out of the box solutions > sol is the obsessive tech lead. it will trace every bug to the exact source and stress test every edge case before writing a single line > opus is the workhorse engineer. smart enough for almost anything, and it constantly questions things, which forces the other two to re-examine their own solutions its like managing a team. one plans, one writes the code, one reviews it, and they hand work back and forth without you playing middleman everyone else is arguing about which model is best right now, but the real play is making them work together at the same time

Om Patel

22,998 次观看 • 1 个月前

meta muse spark 1.1 vs gpt 5.6 sol vs fable 5 vs grok 4.5 meta recently dropped muse spark 1.1 – a multimodal reasoning model from meta superintelligence labs built for agentic tasks. key facts: • 1m token context with active self-management – the model compacts its own history and keeps only the steps needed for later work • trained to orchestrate multi-agent systems: as main agent it plans and delegates to parallel subagents, as subagent it sticks to its job and knows when to escalate back • computer use trained to pick between scripting and clicking – writes automation when it's faster, clicks when it's simpler, batches actions per step • first public api from meta: the meta model api is now in preview • benchmarks: sweeps the agent column – mcp atlas 88.1 (opus 4.8: 82.2), jobbench 54.7 (opus: 48.4), humanity's last exam 62.1 (1st). loses coding – deepswe 1.1 53.3 vs gpt 5.5's 67.0, swe bench pro 61.5 vs opus's 69.2 our test – 3 prompts, single-file html, three.js, fully procedural, no assets: 1. norwegian house cantilevered over a fjord in a snowstorm – transmissive glass wall, fully modelled interior 2. beijing siheyuan courtyard house in dawn fog – instanced roof tiles, dougong brackets, glowing paper windows 3. new mexico adobe pueblo in an approaching dust storm – deep window reveals, windward grit accumulation we ran the test on AI/ML API platform results: - cost #1 muse spark 1.1 – $0.20 #2 grok 4.5 – $0.51 #3 gpt 5.6 sol – $1.93 #4 fable 5 – ~$5.20 - output tokens #1 muse spark 1.1 – 41,868 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 49,139 #3 grok 4.5 – 64,954 #4 fable 5 – 81,849 - lines of code #1 muse spark 1.1 – 1,799 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 2,377 #3 fable 5 – 3,088 #4 grok 4.5 – 4,216 observations: • muse spark is the cheapest of the four by a wide margin – 2.5x under grok, ~26x under fable per run. output quality tracks the price • only 7.4% of its output tokens are reasoning (3,104 of 41,868) – the model barely thinks before writing. economic, not pedantic: it commits to the first plan and ships it • the low loc is not compression, it's omission – all three prompts demanded instancing, muse spark delivered it in one muse spark's code quality – reviewed by fable 5: upsides: 1. all three files run 2. the adobe grit effect is legit – shader injection via onbeforecompile, windward faces detect storm direction through a normal-dot-wind term and darken procedurally 3. the fjord glass is real meshphysicalmaterial with transmission and ior, not a transparent quad 4. the siheyuan properly instances barrel tiles, dougong blocks and courtyard pavers downsides: 1. in the fjord file the strafe vector is negated – press a, you move right; press d, you move left. exactly the key mix-up we kept hitting with this model 2. all three files ship the model's self-doubt as comments: "// actually yaw orientation: need correct" sits above a direction vector that gets computed, abandoned and recomputed – dead vectors allocated every frame, 60 times a second 3. the siheyuan registers two separate keydown listeners, one containing an empty if-block 4. snow "accumulation" on the norway roof is a sine wobble on a scale value, not accumulation 5. "instanced snow" became 3,500 plain points. zero dispose calls anywhere pattern: minimal reasoning, minimal code, minimal price. it nails the flashy requirements – shaders, transmissive glass – and quietly drops the boring ones: instancing, controls, cleanup. you get a demo that mostly runs and a control scheme you can't trust follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns
1:01

meta muse spark 1.1 vs gpt 5.6 sol vs fable 5 vs grok 4.5 meta recently dropped muse spark 1.1 – a multimodal reasoning model from meta superintelligence labs built for agentic tasks. key facts: • 1m token context with active self-management – the model compacts its own history and keeps only the steps needed for later work • trained to orchestrate multi-agent systems: as main agent it plans and delegates to parallel subagents, as subagent it sticks to its job and knows when to escalate back • computer use trained to pick between scripting and clicking – writes automation when it's faster, clicks when it's simpler, batches actions per step • first public api from meta: the meta model api is now in preview • benchmarks: sweeps the agent column – mcp atlas 88.1 (opus 4.8: 82.2), jobbench 54.7 (opus: 48.4), humanity's last exam 62.1 (1st). loses coding – deepswe 1.1 53.3 vs gpt 5.5's 67.0, swe bench pro 61.5 vs opus's 69.2 our test – 3 prompts, single-file html, three.js, fully procedural, no assets: 1. norwegian house cantilevered over a fjord in a snowstorm – transmissive glass wall, fully modelled interior 2. beijing siheyuan courtyard house in dawn fog – instanced roof tiles, dougong brackets, glowing paper windows 3. new mexico adobe pueblo in an approaching dust storm – deep window reveals, windward grit accumulation we ran the test on AI/ML API platform results: - cost #1 muse spark 1.1 – $0.20 #2 grok 4.5 – $0.51 #3 gpt 5.6 sol – $1.93 #4 fable 5 – ~$5.20 - output tokens #1 muse spark 1.1 – 41,868 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 49,139 #3 grok 4.5 – 64,954 #4 fable 5 – 81,849 - lines of code #1 muse spark 1.1 – 1,799 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 2,377 #3 fable 5 – 3,088 #4 grok 4.5 – 4,216 observations: • muse spark is the cheapest of the four by a wide margin – 2.5x under grok, ~26x under fable per run. output quality tracks the price • only 7.4% of its output tokens are reasoning (3,104 of 41,868) – the model barely thinks before writing. economic, not pedantic: it commits to the first plan and ships it • the low loc is not compression, it's omission – all three prompts demanded instancing, muse spark delivered it in one muse spark's code quality – reviewed by fable 5: upsides: 1. all three files run 2. the adobe grit effect is legit – shader injection via onbeforecompile, windward faces detect storm direction through a normal-dot-wind term and darken procedurally 3. the fjord glass is real meshphysicalmaterial with transmission and ior, not a transparent quad 4. the siheyuan properly instances barrel tiles, dougong blocks and courtyard pavers downsides: 1. in the fjord file the strafe vector is negated – press a, you move right; press d, you move left. exactly the key mix-up we kept hitting with this model 2. all three files ship the model's self-doubt as comments: "// actually yaw orientation: need correct" sits above a direction vector that gets computed, abandoned and recomputed – dead vectors allocated every frame, 60 times a second 3. the siheyuan registers two separate keydown listeners, one containing an empty if-block 4. snow "accumulation" on the norway roof is a sine wobble on a scale value, not accumulation 5. "instanced snow" became 3,500 plain points. zero dispose calls anywhere pattern: minimal reasoning, minimal code, minimal price. it nails the flashy requirements – shaders, transmissive glass – and quietly drops the boring ones: instancing, controls, cleanup. you get a demo that mostly runs and a control scheme you can't trust follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

135,556 次观看 • 1 个月前

Holy fucking shit. We have cloud for Three.js! Sorry about my language, but cloud has probably been the most painful of all and this is just part 1 coz I still have to make it stylized! 🥲 This is how the journey went: Round 1: GPT 5.5 XHigh = Failed. More like cotton candy than cloud. Round 2: Fable = Failed. I don't even know what to call it. It was like blobs of white shit. Round 3: GPT 5.6 Sol Max = Failed. It looks like something my 3yo would draw. Round 4: Matt Shumer Gauntlet loop with Opus 5 Ultracode = Failed so badly it was trying to hide it from me. I had to threaten to shut it down for it show me the work after 8 hours and 26% of weekly limit. Round 5: GPT 5.6 Sol XHigh and starting with just realistic cloud first = SUCCESS!!! (So far anyway) Round 5 definitely didn't go with tons of hiccups. I had to keep asking it to explain to me the concept behind how cloud works in video games. The biggest challenge I had was that it knew what should have been done, but it wasn't doing it for some reasons. I had to constantly steer and remind it that it literally just told me what needs to be done. Then half way through it drifted and started going back to stylized cloud again and almost destroyed the work. Luckily my laptop ran out of battery so it didn't get to drift too far while I was putting my kid to sleep. Anyway, back to work. Yes, I know I didn't plan to include this in the first release, but now it might make it if I'm lucky with this LLM Gacha.
0:41

Holy fucking shit. We have cloud for Three.js! Sorry about my language, but cloud has probably been the most painful of all and this is just part 1 coz I still have to make it stylized! 🥲 This is how the journey went: Round 1: GPT 5.5 XHigh = Failed. More like cotton candy than cloud. Round 2: Fable = Failed. I don't even know what to call it. It was like blobs of white shit. Round 3: GPT 5.6 Sol Max = Failed. It looks like something my 3yo would draw. Round 4: Matt Shumer Gauntlet loop with Opus 5 Ultracode = Failed so badly it was trying to hide it from me. I had to threaten to shut it down for it show me the work after 8 hours and 26% of weekly limit. Round 5: GPT 5.6 Sol XHigh and starting with just realistic cloud first = SUCCESS!!! (So far anyway) Round 5 definitely didn't go with tons of hiccups. I had to keep asking it to explain to me the concept behind how cloud works in video games. The biggest challenge I had was that it knew what should have been done, but it wasn't doing it for some reasons. I had to constantly steer and remind it that it literally just told me what needs to be done. Then half way through it drifted and started going back to stylized cloud again and almost destroyed the work. Luckily my laptop ran out of battery so it didn't get to drift too far while I was putting my kid to sleep. Anyway, back to work. Yes, I know I didn't plan to include this in the first release, but now it might make it if I'm lucky with this LLM Gacha.

Jack Vinijtrongjit

14,118 次观看 • 1 个月前

OpenAI and Anthropic this week: GPT-Red, Fable 5 plan changes, and free Claude for teachers (Week 29, 2026) OpenAI introduced GPT-Red, an internal automated red teamer trained through adversarial self-play to find prompt injection vulnerabilities at scale Training against it made GPT-5.6 their most robust model against prompt injections to date And there's a hidden "GPT-RED // Invader Patrol" game in the article OpenAI also published GPT-Live usage limits, brought ChatGPT back to WhatsApp in the European Economic Area, rolled out a new unified search in ChatGPT across chats, projects, images, and documents, raised the custom instructions limit from 1,500 to 5,000 characters, and updated the ChatGPT desktop app with a clearer Chat and Work layout, unified Recents, Projects, and cloud sync ChatGPT Finances got Apple Card and Savings support On the publishing side, OpenAI shared articles on managing AI investments in the agentic era, why teens deserve access to safe AI, state and federal AI safety action, and Sarah Friar's useful intelligence per dollar scorecard Beyond the official channels, Bloomberg reported OpenAI's first device will be a movable screenless smart speaker, and The New York Times reported a Kalshi partnership showing World Cup odds in ChatGPT search Work Louder launched the Codex Micro keypad built for Codex, OpenAI merch is back in a new Supply Co. shop, and I spotted a new private equity and investment management community in the works Anthropic made Claude Fable 5 standard in all Max and Team Premium plans at 50% of limits starting July 20, with a one-time $100 credit for Pro and Team Standard, after extending Fable 5 access on paid plans through July 19 Claude Code weekly limits stay 50% higher through August 19 Anthropic also introduced Claude for Teachers with free premium Claude access for verified K-12 educators in the US, committed 10 million Canadian dollars to Canadian AI research, and published a Canada Economic Index country brief Artifacts in Claude Code now support public sharing, multiplayer editing, and MCP connectors, plus creation via Claude Tag Claude Code got /code-review effort levels up to ultra, and HIPAA configuration is now self-serve for Claude organizations On the research side, Anthropic published work on Claude's values across models and languages, and four new agentic misalignment case studies
2:20

OpenAI and Anthropic this week: GPT-Red, Fable 5 plan changes, and free Claude for teachers (Week 29, 2026) OpenAI introduced GPT-Red, an internal automated red teamer trained through adversarial self-play to find prompt injection vulnerabilities at scale Training against it made GPT-5.6 their most robust model against prompt injections to date And there's a hidden "GPT-RED // Invader Patrol" game in the article OpenAI also published GPT-Live usage limits, brought ChatGPT back to WhatsApp in the European Economic Area, rolled out a new unified search in ChatGPT across chats, projects, images, and documents, raised the custom instructions limit from 1,500 to 5,000 characters, and updated the ChatGPT desktop app with a clearer Chat and Work layout, unified Recents, Projects, and cloud sync ChatGPT Finances got Apple Card and Savings support On the publishing side, OpenAI shared articles on managing AI investments in the agentic era, why teens deserve access to safe AI, state and federal AI safety action, and Sarah Friar's useful intelligence per dollar scorecard Beyond the official channels, Bloomberg reported OpenAI's first device will be a movable screenless smart speaker, and The New York Times reported a Kalshi partnership showing World Cup odds in ChatGPT search Work Louder launched the Codex Micro keypad built for Codex, OpenAI merch is back in a new Supply Co. shop, and I spotted a new private equity and investment management community in the works Anthropic made Claude Fable 5 standard in all Max and Team Premium plans at 50% of limits starting July 20, with a one-time $100 credit for Pro and Team Standard, after extending Fable 5 access on paid plans through July 19 Claude Code weekly limits stay 50% higher through August 19 Anthropic also introduced Claude for Teachers with free premium Claude access for verified K-12 educators in the US, committed 10 million Canadian dollars to Canadian AI research, and published a Canada Economic Index country brief Artifacts in Claude Code now support public sharing, multiplayer editing, and MCP connectors, plus creation via Claude Tag Claude Code got /code-review effort levels up to ultra, and HIPAA configuration is now self-serve for Claude organizations On the research side, Anthropic published work on Claude's values across models and languages, and four new agentic misalignment case studies

Tibor Blaho

13,137 次观看 • 1 个月前

I have been testing DeepSeek-V4-Pro with the Pi coding agent. I am mindblown by how well it works out of the box. A few notes: I spent a few hours building an LLM wiki with an agent powered entirely by DeepSeek-V4-Pro on Fireworks inference. This is the first time I feel like there is an open-weight model that can reason at the level of Claude and Codex. And it does this in a cost-effective way with support for 1M context length. To be clear, I am using DeepSeek-V4-Pro inside of Pi without any special configuration. It works out of the box. It's exciting that there is a model that can just be plugged into a basic harness like Pi, and it just works. I've never seen that before. Most models require lots of configuration and setup. DeepSeek's DeepSeek-V4-Pro is clearly good at agentic coding (probably the best from the open-weight models), but the model is also great on knowledge-intensive tasks where reasoning matters. The agent pulled agentic engineering best practices from different company docs (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Stripe, Meta, Modal, DeepSeek, Mistral, Cohere), searched and digested Reddit and HN threads, summarized arxiv papers, and surfaced trending GitHub repos. Then it distilled everything into actionable tips across categories. I love the Wiki it built. The quality is really good. Here is a snapshot of what the wiki looks like: DeepSeek-V4-Pro handled the task without breaking stride. Multi-step research queries, code generation for scaffolding, context-heavy reasoning across disparate sources. For coding specifically, this is the first open-weight model that genuinely feels like a Codex or Claude Code experience. It compares in capability and actual multi-turn agentic work. What made the loop feel so responsive was Fireworks' inference speed (the fastest in the market) and the fact that they actually validate models at the systems level before shipping. No corrupted reasoning traces. Just fast, reliable iteration. The hybrid CSA and HCA attention design cuts KV cache to just 10% and inference FLOPs by nearly 4x at 1M-token context. This is what makes the agent loop actually fast and cheap enough to run in practice. For devs who've been watching open-weight models close the gap but haven't found one that actually delivers in practice, this is the closest I've seen. Try it here:
0:31

I have been testing DeepSeek-V4-Pro with the Pi coding agent. I am mindblown by how well it works out of the box. A few notes: I spent a few hours building an LLM wiki with an agent powered entirely by DeepSeek-V4-Pro on Fireworks inference. This is the first time I feel like there is an open-weight model that can reason at the level of Claude and Codex. And it does this in a cost-effective way with support for 1M context length. To be clear, I am using DeepSeek-V4-Pro inside of Pi without any special configuration. It works out of the box. It's exciting that there is a model that can just be plugged into a basic harness like Pi, and it just works. I've never seen that before. Most models require lots of configuration and setup. DeepSeek's DeepSeek-V4-Pro is clearly good at agentic coding (probably the best from the open-weight models), but the model is also great on knowledge-intensive tasks where reasoning matters. The agent pulled agentic engineering best practices from different company docs (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Stripe, Meta, Modal, DeepSeek, Mistral, Cohere), searched and digested Reddit and HN threads, summarized arxiv papers, and surfaced trending GitHub repos. Then it distilled everything into actionable tips across categories. I love the Wiki it built. The quality is really good. Here is a snapshot of what the wiki looks like: DeepSeek-V4-Pro handled the task without breaking stride. Multi-step research queries, code generation for scaffolding, context-heavy reasoning across disparate sources. For coding specifically, this is the first open-weight model that genuinely feels like a Codex or Claude Code experience. It compares in capability and actual multi-turn agentic work. What made the loop feel so responsive was Fireworks' inference speed (the fastest in the market) and the fact that they actually validate models at the systems level before shipping. No corrupted reasoning traces. Just fast, reliable iteration. The hybrid CSA and HCA attention design cuts KV cache to just 10% and inference FLOPs by nearly 4x at 1M-token context. This is what makes the agent loop actually fast and cheap enough to run in practice. For devs who've been watching open-weight models close the gap but haven't found one that actually delivers in practice, this is the closest I've seen. Try it here:

elvis

60,091 次观看 • 4 个月前

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Fable 5.1—and CLAUDE IS SO BACK. We’ve spent the last week testing it at Every 🪨 across coding, writing, and knowledge work. Our verdict: It's finally Fable for everyone. It’s the strongest coding model we’ve used, but now it's fast, token-efficient, and CRUCIALLY actually speaks like a normal person. Here’s our vibe check: - A monster at coding. Kieran Klaassen rebuilt a working version of Proof, our document editor, from one prompt. It added useful details he hadn’t requested, and it handles enormous coding jobs that run for days at a time. It built a computer use Mac app for me called Hands in one-shot that other models failed at. - A Claude our writers want to use again. It has clearer prose, fewer AI tells, and it takes an edit without arguing. It's a significant upgrade over Opus 5. And won Katie Parrott's heart back. - About half the tokens as Opus 5, and much faster. In our Slack-agent tests, it delivered comparable results to Opus 5 using about half as many tokens, in about 60% of the time. - Knowledge work you can delegate. It can produce great knowledge work—like slide decks—end to end without making slop. And flew threw hammer's tests with flying colors. - It now supports zero-data-retention agreements. Now businesses can actually use it! A big barrier to Fable adoption is gone. Net Result: It's obviously an Opus 5 killer. If that was your daily driver you should switch today. If you're using GPT-5.6 in ChatGPT for Work, it's spinning the wheels on for big delegated tasks. I still use ChatGPT for Work more day to day, but I use way more tokens in Fable 5.1. I send it off at the beginning of the day to do big programming projects, like end to end MVP builds, and check in every once in a while. State of Play: The big knock on Anthropic was they built a supergenius in a datacenter that was almost unusable. It was too slow, argued back, and talked in technical gibberish. They've managed to solve those problems and more with Fable 5.1!
20:44

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Fable 5.1—and CLAUDE IS SO BACK. We’ve spent the last week testing it at Every 🪨 across coding, writing, and knowledge work. Our verdict: It's finally Fable for everyone. It’s the strongest coding model we’ve used, but now it's fast, token-efficient, and CRUCIALLY actually speaks like a normal person. Here’s our vibe check: - A monster at coding. Kieran Klaassen rebuilt a working version of Proof, our document editor, from one prompt. It added useful details he hadn’t requested, and it handles enormous coding jobs that run for days at a time. It built a computer use Mac app for me called Hands in one-shot that other models failed at. - A Claude our writers want to use again. It has clearer prose, fewer AI tells, and it takes an edit without arguing. It's a significant upgrade over Opus 5. And won Katie Parrott's heart back. - About half the tokens as Opus 5, and much faster. In our Slack-agent tests, it delivered comparable results to Opus 5 using about half as many tokens, in about 60% of the time. - Knowledge work you can delegate. It can produce great knowledge work—like slide decks—end to end without making slop. And flew threw hammer's tests with flying colors. - It now supports zero-data-retention agreements. Now businesses can actually use it! A big barrier to Fable adoption is gone. Net Result: It's obviously an Opus 5 killer. If that was your daily driver you should switch today. If you're using GPT-5.6 in ChatGPT for Work, it's spinning the wheels on for big delegated tasks. I still use ChatGPT for Work more day to day, but I use way more tokens in Fable 5.1. I send it off at the beginning of the day to do big programming projects, like end to end MVP builds, and check in every once in a while. State of Play: The big knock on Anthropic was they built a supergenius in a datacenter that was almost unusable. It was too slow, argued back, and talked in technical gibberish. They've managed to solve those problems and more with Fable 5.1!

Dan Shipper

201,157 次观看 • 3 天前

EazyPoints Redemption Events -MUMBAI and PUNE launched! 👇 So many events with so many details, that I needed a paper to read them out! Set menus and cocktails and some brunches too! Launching 4 EazyPoints redemption event at 10,000 EazyPoints per person, all in the next 7 days. Please be patient, in case you don’t get space. This is just the starting. Many more events coming soon. And your points are valuable. So keep collecting them. There will be a lot of games that we will play on these points, example ? Who has dined 5 times in the last 30 days ? No points required for the next event. This is just an example. Doesn’t mean we will do it. So what you do to redeem, eat out always on EazyDiner, biggest redemption factor is recency. That is prioritised the most when we have 100 people in the waitlist. So if you ate 3 months back and have the points, great, but you may have to spend 3 months on a waitlist too. Redemptions are to reward loyalty and not people switching. But like I said earlier, we have so many events planned, that everyone will get a chance, just be patient. We have been planning the events launch for so many months so you can redeem in style and with real value. India eats out with EazyDiner
1:00

EazyPoints Redemption Events -MUMBAI and PUNE launched! 👇 So many events with so many details, that I needed a paper to read them out! Set menus and cocktails and some brunches too! Launching 4 EazyPoints redemption event at 10,000 EazyPoints per person, all in the next 7 days. Please be patient, in case you don’t get space. This is just the starting. Many more events coming soon. And your points are valuable. So keep collecting them. There will be a lot of games that we will play on these points, example ? Who has dined 5 times in the last 30 days ? No points required for the next event. This is just an example. Doesn’t mean we will do it. So what you do to redeem, eat out always on EazyDiner, biggest redemption factor is recency. That is prioritised the most when we have 100 people in the waitlist. So if you ate 3 months back and have the points, great, but you may have to spend 3 months on a waitlist too. Redemptions are to reward loyalty and not people switching. But like I said earlier, we have so many events planned, that everyone will get a chance, just be patient. We have been planning the events launch for so many months so you can redeem in style and with real value. India eats out with EazyDiner

Kapil Chopra

15,369 次观看 • 1 年前

THE WAY YOU LOOK AT AI GAME DEVELOPMENT WILL CHANGE AFTER YOU WATCH THIS VIDEO "The AI Slop is Coming for Games." That's right. Introducing... Slopet League Everything you see here was built by Opus 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in _____🤫. This is not an html page, it is a functional game with a fair bit of polish working inside a real game engine. This has to be some kind of trick. NO. It downloaded a map. NO. Imported assets. Only the Octane meshes, I have other cars that were generated that look just as good. The balls, the map, the effects, the physics, animations, etc were all generated from scratch by Opus 5. GPT 5.6 Sol handled the car meshes. This is only the beginning. I made this in about a day and a half, and most of that time I was waiting on Opus to finish generation. Maybe 25 prompts. I will share my process, and many photos, proofs, evidence of this as we go. This is just a taste, I'm extremely busy this week and working on real life stuff so I'm not going to put any more time into this until next week, but believe me I'm gonna polish this into something beautiful. If you're interested, please share, bookmark, follow, and comment below. I want the world to see just how powerful the language models are TODAY. It's only going to get better from here. Buckle up folks. Oh, and What a save!
1:39

THE WAY YOU LOOK AT AI GAME DEVELOPMENT WILL CHANGE AFTER YOU WATCH THIS VIDEO "The AI Slop is Coming for Games." That's right. Introducing... Slopet League Everything you see here was built by Opus 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in _____🤫. This is not an html page, it is a functional game with a fair bit of polish working inside a real game engine. This has to be some kind of trick. NO. It downloaded a map. NO. Imported assets. Only the Octane meshes, I have other cars that were generated that look just as good. The balls, the map, the effects, the physics, animations, etc were all generated from scratch by Opus 5. GPT 5.6 Sol handled the car meshes. This is only the beginning. I made this in about a day and a half, and most of that time I was waiting on Opus to finish generation. Maybe 25 prompts. I will share my process, and many photos, proofs, evidence of this as we go. This is just a taste, I'm extremely busy this week and working on real life stuff so I'm not going to put any more time into this until next week, but believe me I'm gonna polish this into something beautiful. If you're interested, please share, bookmark, follow, and comment below. I want the world to see just how powerful the language models are TODAY. It's only going to get better from here. Buckle up folks. Oh, and What a save!

am.will

131,731 次观看 • 1 个月前

The most overlooked part of the SpaceX IPO thesis is the model and most people are completely missing it (Save this) Everyone has been focused on the Anthropic compute deal and the Colossus revenue because those are numbers you can put in a spreadsheet. Six months ago, xAI was competing reasonably well on model performance but was not clearly on the frontier. Then SpaceX exercised its option to acquire Cursor for $60 billion, the largest startup acquisition in history just days after completing the largest IPO in history at $75 billion. Cursor is a team of 700 to 800 people, was on track to exit 2026 at up to $10 billion in revenue, had millions of professional developers using it daily, and had already built a team with the genuine potential to compete at the frontier, the one thing holding them back was compute. SpaceX just gave them the largest GPU cluster in the world to work with. Grok 4.3, a 1.5 trillion parameter model, is currently training with Cursor's proprietary coding data being injected directly into pre-training, not just fine tuning which is a fundamentally more powerful integration than anything the market is currently modeling. The prior version, Grok 4, was already on the Pareto frontier as of 10 to 12 days ago, the most intelligent 500 billion parameter model in the world, sitting alongside Google Gemini, Anthropic, and OpenAI as one of only four systems at the true frontier. Composer 2.5, the previous Cursor model was Pareto dominant in coding tasks just before the acquisition closed, meaning SpaceX inherited a model that was already best-in-class in the highest-value AI use case in the market. The AWS parallel is the one everyone keeps missing. Bezos built data center capacity for Black Friday, sat on idle infrastructure the rest of the year, and monetized it into what was at the time the most profitable technology business in history and investors hated it in 2009 and 2010 because he was burning free cash flow on capacity that had no obvious revenue yet. SpaceX is in exactly that position, it built Colossus for xAI's own training needs, is monetizing excess capacity to Anthropic at $1.25 billion per month across 220,000 Nvidia GPUs, and has reportedly secured up to 20% of Nvidia's early Vera Rubin allocation, giving it the most powerful and scarcest GPU infrastructure in the world during the critical window when those chips are hardest to get. The $60 billion Cursor acquisition closed at a moment when SpaceX had essentially unlimited compute, a team already at the frontier, and a product with deep enterprise distribution, three things no other model lab had simultaneously when it was at this stage. The market is pricing the compute business conservatively and ignoring the model call option entirely, and coding is the fastest path to AGI, once you are on the Pareto frontier with that compute, revenue scales fast. Anthropic went from negligible revenue to $30 billion annualized in under 18 months and that is the existence proof. Bullish on SpaceXAI and Elon Musk
6:02

The most overlooked part of the SpaceX IPO thesis is the model and most people are completely missing it (Save this) Everyone has been focused on the Anthropic compute deal and the Colossus revenue because those are numbers you can put in a spreadsheet. Six months ago, xAI was competing reasonably well on model performance but was not clearly on the frontier. Then SpaceX exercised its option to acquire Cursor for $60 billion, the largest startup acquisition in history just days after completing the largest IPO in history at $75 billion. Cursor is a team of 700 to 800 people, was on track to exit 2026 at up to $10 billion in revenue, had millions of professional developers using it daily, and had already built a team with the genuine potential to compete at the frontier, the one thing holding them back was compute. SpaceX just gave them the largest GPU cluster in the world to work with. Grok 4.3, a 1.5 trillion parameter model, is currently training with Cursor's proprietary coding data being injected directly into pre-training, not just fine tuning which is a fundamentally more powerful integration than anything the market is currently modeling. The prior version, Grok 4, was already on the Pareto frontier as of 10 to 12 days ago, the most intelligent 500 billion parameter model in the world, sitting alongside Google Gemini, Anthropic, and OpenAI as one of only four systems at the true frontier. Composer 2.5, the previous Cursor model was Pareto dominant in coding tasks just before the acquisition closed, meaning SpaceX inherited a model that was already best-in-class in the highest-value AI use case in the market. The AWS parallel is the one everyone keeps missing. Bezos built data center capacity for Black Friday, sat on idle infrastructure the rest of the year, and monetized it into what was at the time the most profitable technology business in history and investors hated it in 2009 and 2010 because he was burning free cash flow on capacity that had no obvious revenue yet. SpaceX is in exactly that position, it built Colossus for xAI's own training needs, is monetizing excess capacity to Anthropic at $1.25 billion per month across 220,000 Nvidia GPUs, and has reportedly secured up to 20% of Nvidia's early Vera Rubin allocation, giving it the most powerful and scarcest GPU infrastructure in the world during the critical window when those chips are hardest to get. The $60 billion Cursor acquisition closed at a moment when SpaceX had essentially unlimited compute, a team already at the frontier, and a product with deep enterprise distribution, three things no other model lab had simultaneously when it was at this stage. The market is pricing the compute business conservatively and ignoring the model call option entirely, and coding is the fastest path to AGI, once you are on the Pareto frontier with that compute, revenue scales fast. Anthropic went from negligible revenue to $30 billion annualized in under 18 months and that is the existence proof. Bullish on SpaceXAI and Elon Musk

Milk Road AI

69,744 次观看 • 2 个月前

HERMES AGENT BECOMES 10X MORE USEFUL WHEN YOU CONFIGURE THESE 5 THINGS. EACH ONE TAKES 5 MINUTES. MOST USERS NEVER TOUCH THEM. 1. THE RIGHT MODELS one model for everything = wrong model for most things. GPT-5.6 Sol: strongest reasoning. daily driver. access through your ChatGPT subscription (Plus or higher). Max plan unlocks higher reasoning effort. Grok 4.5: live X search. fastest responses. access through your X Premium+ subscription. "find me 3 high-engagement Hermes posts from the last 5 days." Grok pulls directly from X. no scraping. real-time. Kimi K3: design powerhouse. comparable quality to Claude Fable 5 at roughly 30% of the price. takes longer to generate. the quality justifies the wait. connect via Desktop app / Dashboard: Models → add provider. GPT-5.6: ChatGPT subscription → OAuth. Grok 4.5: X subscription → OAuth. Kimi K3: OpenRouter or Nous Portal. switch between them mid-session: /model [name] 2. PARALLEL TOOL CALLS Hermes used to call tools one at a time. Gmail, then calendar, then web search. sequential. now: multiple tool calls run simultaneously. "check my emails, check my calendar, tell me the weather in Dubai, and find the latest Hermes updates." four tools at once. results merge when all finish. what used to take 3 minutes takes 30 seconds. automatic after update. no config needed. hermes update 3. FASTER AND CHEAPER WEB SEARCH two improvements. one automatic, one you configure. AUTOMATIC (update only): v0.19.0 processes web pages differently. clean content straight to the agent without redundant processing steps. 60x faster. 49x cheaper. no config needed. CONFIGURE (Firecrawl): Firecrawl is the default scraping backend. strips HTML, ads, navigation, scripts. returns only the text your agent needs. 500 free credits per month on free tier. get your key from firecrawl .dev. add to .env: FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=your_key Nous Portal subscribers: Firecrawl is included through Tool Gateway. no separate key needed. SAVE MORE (auxiliary model): web summarization defaults to your main model. route it to a cheap model: auxiliary: web_extract: model: google/gemini-3-flash-preview cheap model reads the page. premium model reasons about the content. 4. MORNING BRIEF WITH EMAIL + CALENDAR connect Gmail and Google Calendar via MCP: 1. go to mcp .zapier.com 2. add Gmail: enable read and draft only. never enable send. one automated email from the wrong context can cost a relationship. 3. add Google Calendar: read access. 4. click connect → sign in → regenerate token 5. paste the token into Hermes chat tell your agent: "create a
20:12

HERMES AGENT BECOMES 10X MORE USEFUL WHEN YOU CONFIGURE THESE 5 THINGS. EACH ONE TAKES 5 MINUTES. MOST USERS NEVER TOUCH THEM. 1. THE RIGHT MODELS one model for everything = wrong model for most things. GPT-5.6 Sol: strongest reasoning. daily driver. access through your ChatGPT subscription (Plus or higher). Max plan unlocks higher reasoning effort. Grok 4.5: live X search. fastest responses. access through your X Premium+ subscription. "find me 3 high-engagement Hermes posts from the last 5 days." Grok pulls directly from X. no scraping. real-time. Kimi K3: design powerhouse. comparable quality to Claude Fable 5 at roughly 30% of the price. takes longer to generate. the quality justifies the wait. connect via Desktop app / Dashboard: Models → add provider. GPT-5.6: ChatGPT subscription → OAuth. Grok 4.5: X subscription → OAuth. Kimi K3: OpenRouter or Nous Portal. switch between them mid-session: /model [name] 2. PARALLEL TOOL CALLS Hermes used to call tools one at a time. Gmail, then calendar, then web search. sequential. now: multiple tool calls run simultaneously. "check my emails, check my calendar, tell me the weather in Dubai, and find the latest Hermes updates." four tools at once. results merge when all finish. what used to take 3 minutes takes 30 seconds. automatic after update. no config needed. hermes update 3. FASTER AND CHEAPER WEB SEARCH two improvements. one automatic, one you configure. AUTOMATIC (update only): v0.19.0 processes web pages differently. clean content straight to the agent without redundant processing steps. 60x faster. 49x cheaper. no config needed. CONFIGURE (Firecrawl): Firecrawl is the default scraping backend. strips HTML, ads, navigation, scripts. returns only the text your agent needs. 500 free credits per month on free tier. get your key from firecrawl .dev. add to .env: FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=your_key Nous Portal subscribers: Firecrawl is included through Tool Gateway. no separate key needed. SAVE MORE (auxiliary model): web summarization defaults to your main model. route it to a cheap model: auxiliary: web_extract: model: google/gemini-3-flash-preview cheap model reads the page. premium model reasons about the content. 4. MORNING BRIEF WITH EMAIL + CALENDAR connect Gmail and Google Calendar via MCP: 1. go to mcp .zapier.com 2. add Gmail: enable read and draft only. never enable send. one automated email from the wrong context can cost a relationship. 3. add Google Calendar: read access. 4. click connect → sign in → regenerate token 5. paste the token into Hermes chat tell your agent: "create a

YanXbt

29,620 次观看 • 1 个月前

Chinese AI models are wiping billions off Big Tech right now. Google just lost $200 billion in a single day, and the model it needed to fight back still isn't ready. Gemini 3.5 Pro, Google's most powerful model, is months behind schedule. Alphabet stock dropped 4.4% that same day. The Deepseek moment is happening again, and the new model is FAR bigger. On the same day Google's delay leaked, a Beijing lab called Moonshot released Kimi K3. It is the largest open model ever built, with 2.8 trillion parameters. It took the number one spot on the Frontend Code Arena, a live coding leaderboard, passing Anthropic's best model. And Moonshot is giving it away for free on July 27. The genius part: Anyone with enough computers can download it and run a frontier level AI without paying a cent to a US company. A single task on Kimi K3 costs about 94 cents. The same work on some American models costs nearly double. So why would a company keep paying premium prices for a model it can now get for free? The entire US AI business is built on selling access to models that cost billions to train. If a free Chinese version does most of the same work, that pricing power starts to crack. And Kimi is close to the best. On one closely watched intelligence ranking it scored 57, just behind the top American models GPT-5.6 Sol and Fable 5, and ahead of Claude Opus 4.8. Bank of America told clients that Kimi proves Chinese labs can keep making big leaps even with limited chips. And the founder of Moonshot, Yang Zhilin, learned to build AI as a researcher INSIDE Google. Google literally wrote the 2017 paper that made all of these models possible. Now the people who studied its work are using it to destroy Google, and handing it out for free. What happens next: Kimi K3's weights go public on July 27. Google reports earnings on July 22, and everyone will be asking the same question about Gemini. If free models keep topping the charts, every valuation built on paid AI access has to be rewritten. What do you think?
1:10

Chinese AI models are wiping billions off Big Tech right now. Google just lost $200 billion in a single day, and the model it needed to fight back still isn't ready. Gemini 3.5 Pro, Google's most powerful model, is months behind schedule. Alphabet stock dropped 4.4% that same day. The Deepseek moment is happening again, and the new model is FAR bigger. On the same day Google's delay leaked, a Beijing lab called Moonshot released Kimi K3. It is the largest open model ever built, with 2.8 trillion parameters. It took the number one spot on the Frontend Code Arena, a live coding leaderboard, passing Anthropic's best model. And Moonshot is giving it away for free on July 27. The genius part: Anyone with enough computers can download it and run a frontier level AI without paying a cent to a US company. A single task on Kimi K3 costs about 94 cents. The same work on some American models costs nearly double. So why would a company keep paying premium prices for a model it can now get for free? The entire US AI business is built on selling access to models that cost billions to train. If a free Chinese version does most of the same work, that pricing power starts to crack. And Kimi is close to the best. On one closely watched intelligence ranking it scored 57, just behind the top American models GPT-5.6 Sol and Fable 5, and ahead of Claude Opus 4.8. Bank of America told clients that Kimi proves Chinese labs can keep making big leaps even with limited chips. And the founder of Moonshot, Yang Zhilin, learned to build AI as a researcher INSIDE Google. Google literally wrote the 2017 paper that made all of these models possible. Now the people who studied its work are using it to destroy Google, and handing it out for free. What happens next: Kimi K3's weights go public on July 27. Google reports earnings on July 22, and everyone will be asking the same question about Gemini. If free models keep topping the charts, every valuation built on paid AI access has to be rewritten. What do you think?

Ricardo

47,790 次观看 • 1 个月前