Claude 4 feels pretty weak compared to what I’d think Claude 4 would have been a year away. It makes little progress on most benchmarks with a lot of tricks in them to exaggerate performance. Gemini 2.5 pro feels a bit stronger but not that much stronger. (It feels stronger since they didn’t call it Gemini 3, not because it’s particularly stronger than Claude) 

Current methods have definitely hit a wall but AGI simultaneously feels pretty close. Strange timeline to be in. I predict progress will be a jump after the next breakthrough. 

https://x.com/rwang07/status/1924658336600854632

Other countries adopting Chinese hardware may mean this was basically the US being forced to sell their GPUs to prevent the Chinese from taking advantage of economies of scale.

Have you heard the idea where you just train the model on a range of constants if your constants are off from the physical world? If the coefficient of friction changed a bit in the real world, I doubt humans would suddenly forget how to move, and instead would adjust pretty quickly. Making a model tolerant to the plausible range of sim2real errors might be possible without having an accurate simulation or hand-crafted heuristics.

Yeah but aren’t false positives also a problem here?

A much more effective pause or slowdown strategy would be to convince people current AI is garbage and not to invest in AI research. 

Do they? I thought they do well on the easier section 

I'd argue OpenAI weaning off Microsoft is a sign of strength. They no longer need give up immense future profits to a big tech company to back them, they have shown the ability to raise again and again. They just had the largest funding round in history. They are also probably the fastest growing company revenue wise in human history. Doom and gloom seems a bit premature.

I wonder if giving it an example of the intended translated writing style helps. 

Not just central banks but the U.S. going off the gold standard too then fiddling with bond yields to cover up ensuing inflation maybe?

It's quite strange that owning all the world's (public) productive assets have only beaten gold, a largely useless shiny metal, by 1% per year over the last 56 years.  

Even if you focus on rolling metrics to(this is 5 year rolling returns).:

there are lots of long stretches of gold beating world equities, especially in recent times. There are people with the suspicion (myself included) that there hasn't been much material growth in the world over the last 40 or so years compared to before. And that since growth is slowing down, this issue is worse if you select more recent points in time, with gold handily beating equities if you start 25 years ago.
 

Has GDP essentially been goodharted by central banks in recent times? Wonder if there's more research into this.