5,794 karma · joined April 20, 2021
This 1988 model of the flow of information in free societies and their media gatekeepers was probably correct. Nearly 40 years later it is not. The digital content flows in free societies is so diverse today that widely read content extremely critical of whichever parties or power-holders you'd like to read about is everywhere and easy to find. Not the case in authoritarian systems.
For example the APEX-Agents benchmark for long time horizon investment banking, consulting and legal work:
1. Gemini 3.1 Pro - 33.2% 2. Opus 4.6 - 29.8% 3. GPT 5.2 Codex - 27.6% 4. Gemini Flash 3.0 - 24.0% 5. GPT 5.2 - 23.0% 6. Gemini 3.0 Pro - 18.0%
https://open.substack.com/pub/lawsen/p/notebooklm-podcasts-b...
Generate a deep technical briefing, not a light podcast overview. Focus on technical accuracy, comprehensive analysis, and extended duration, tailored for an expert listener. The listener has a technical background comparable to a research scientist on an AGI safety team at a leading AI lab. Use precise terminology found in the source materials. Aim for significant length and depth. Aspire to the comprehensiveness and duration of podcasts like 80,000 Hours, running for 2 hours or more.
"Based on our analysis, we do not believe this issue poses an immediate risk to our users."
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/new-apple-cpu...
1.5 Pro-002 came out a couple months ago.
Do they find these by monitoring the brokers of zero days or analyzing devices of people who are being targeted?
This line would ring more true if Google hadn't invented transformers and a host of other ML breakthroughs to bolster search. Also not search related, but inventing self-driving cars and solving protein folding are innovations that benefit consumers greatly.
I'd bet Ben himself has compared Google to Bell Labs in the past. To argue they don't innovate is insane.