6 months behind is probably a bit rich, I find the frontier models more capable in sustained agent and compiler tasks. Simple tool-chains and basic reasoning seems more or less on par across the board, at least for my use cases.
I jumped into a NY Times games sub for a year; couldn’t find the cancel button after a couple minutes of fiddling and ended up doing a CC chargeback in 60 seconds.
It’s always the same playbook with these rewards programs. Marketing invents a gimmick, the internet stress-tests it, finance freaks out, and the company quietly rewrites the TOS.
You might be right. The paper mentioned the rats preferred hunting near the light barrier but also mentioned they probably climbed the fabric for an aerial advantage (they didn’t seem to prefer hunting near the light barrier once the fabric was removed).
Putting 6G base stations in orbit is cool, I see that the next level begins when satellites, like Starlink, stop acting like relays and mesh networks relaying bits (Layer 2/3) and instead start computing bits in space to reduce latency, overhead, and turn orbital hardware into legit network infrastructure (Layer 4-7).
> To address the potential loss of important long-running conversations, users will still be able to edit and retry previous messages to create new branches of ended conversations.
How does Claude deciding to end the conversation even matter if you can back up a message or 2 and try again on a new branch?
My take away is that the overall labor per customer decreases because workers are spending less time on non-cooking/serving tasks. The paper implies the efficiency gain is in how labor is used rather than production or serving efficiency. This seems like an anticlimactic conclusion.
In addition to vacuum exposure to address outgassing, they'd probably hit wood with some sterilization process (gamma radiation as one example) to ensure any microbes in the wood are dead before landing on another planet.