2,112 karma · joined June 4, 2009
You don't test a bullet proof vest with rubber bullets. Also, all these arguments about the sandbox being too weak are good in hindsight anyway.
Omarchy, on the other hand, is this close to be a scam: marketed as "the AI distro" just because it has a keyboard shortcut to launch claude-code or codex basically. "opinionated" because it ships with a default desktop manager and a default text editor, just like any other freaking distro out there. Not to mention the fact that it's financed by people who have nothing to do with FOSS.
And please don't fall in the trap that capitalism created things. Science and engineering creates things. Capitalism makes them more accessible, at a price that is often heavily confounded by externalities.
I was one of the early paying adopter of chatgpt but when Claude came around I switched and never looked back. I've been on the max plan for a while.
Never again, thanks.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/03/political-j...
I guess they still suffer from monopoly syndrome. The EU should get them again.
I still have to understand whether it's incompetence or a business model.
Proper rebuttals will come up in due time on the appropriate channels. all the colleagues I talked to are as pissed off as I am about this way of doing science.
- Fig 4a shows Centaur clusters more closely to humans than any other model in a cognitive benchmark (CogBench) but also shows that parental llama cluster closer than claude and openAI thinking models which makes me a bit sceptical of using this measurement at all and reinforces the need for further comparisons.
- the fMRI stuff makes no sense and transforms the paper into a propaganda stunt, IMHO.
- At the end of the paper, the comparison with an "informed" Deepseek-R1 (not shown in data?) shows that a modern reasoning model matches Centaur-performance even without any fine tuning.
The latter point is incredibly interesting in principle but it has nothing to do with the claims of the paper. It basically concludes that a modern reasoning model with CoT can outperform out of the box a "simpler" model that was specifically fine-tuned with a huge dataset of human cognitive behaviours. Bigger claim than the title itself basically IMO.