I haven't noticed anyone else come out and say it here, and I may express this more rigorously later, but, like, GPT-5 is a pretty big bear signal, right? Not just in terms of benchmarks suggesting a non-superexponential trend but also, to name a few angles/anecdata:

• It did slightly worse than o3 at the first thing I tried it on (with thinking mode on)
• It failed to one-shot a practical coding problem that was entirely in javascript, which is generally among its strengths (and the problem was certainly in principle solvable)
• It's hallucinating pretty obviously when I give it a 100 page or so document to read and comment on (it references lots from the document, but gets many details wrong and overfixates on others)
• It's described as an automatic family of models that naturally picks the best for the situation, which seems like exactly what you'd do if nothing else was really giving you the sauce
• The main reddit reaction seems to be that the demo graphs were atrocious, which is not exactly glowing praise
• All the above paired with the fact that this is what they chose to call GPT-5, and with the fact that Claude's latest release was a well-named and justified 0.1 increment

I'm largely with Zvi that even integrating this stuff as it already exists into the economy does some interesting stuff, and that we live in interesting times already. But other than what's already priced in by integrations and efficiency optimizations, progress feels s-curvier to me today than it did a week ago.