Taiwan?

Yeah China might have something to say about that unapproved stimulation.

EDIT: I updated the article to account for this perspective.

------

This can't be right -- they're using LMArena without style control to resolve the market, and GPT-5 is ahead right? (https://lmarena.ai/leaderboard/text/overall-no-style-control)

> This market will resolve according to the company which owns the model which has the highest arena score based off the Chatbot Arena LLM Leaderboard (https://lmarena.ai/) when the table under the "Leaderboard" tab is checked on August 31, 2025, 12:00 PM ET.

> Results from the "Arena Score" section on the Leaderboard tab of https://lmarena.ai/leaderboard/text with the style control off will be used to resolve this market.

> If two models are tied for the top arena score at this market's check time, resolution will be based on whichever company's name, as it is described in this market group, comes first in alphabetical order (e.g. if both were tied, "Google" would resolve to "Yes", and "xAI" would resolve to "No")

> The resolution source for this market is the Chatbot Arena LLM Leaderboard found at https://lmarena.ai/. If this resolution source is unavailable at check time, this market will remain open until the leaderboard comes back online and resolve based on the first check after it becomes available. If it becomes permanently unavailable, this market will resolve based on another resolution source.

> This is an incorrect interpretation. The benchmark which the betting market is based upon currently ranks Gemini 2.5 higher than GPT-5.

You can see from the graph that Google shot way up from ~25% to ~80% upon the release of GPT-5. Google’s model didn’t suddenly get way better at any benchmarks, did it?

Ostensibly a model like Genie3 probably encodes physical laws into the weights like LLMs encode language. That's generally considered a prerequisite for true AGI to have an intuitive grasp of physics as part of their "world model." It's a minor but significant step towards AGI (assuming Genie3 plays out successfully).

Neither are even close to AGI. Here is something they can't do and won't be able to do for a very long time:

If you're inferring in English and ask it a question, it will never be able to pull from the knowledge it has ingested in another language. Humans are able to do this without relying on a neurotic inner voice spinning around in circles and doing manual translations.

This should be enough to arrive at the conclusion that there is no real insights in the model. It has no model of the world.

The debate over whether something is or is not AGI is entirely semantic and basically uninteresting.

Let’s talk about what LLM agents demonstrably can or cannot do. That’s an interesting discussion and we can design experiments to validate the claims. Comparing how LLMs perform versus humans in various tasks is also interesting and verifiable.

But trying to decide whether LLM agents have crossed over some amorphous, imaginary line with no quantitative definition is just a waste of time. It’s about equally productive as debating the question: “which is more human, an ant eater or a tree shrew?” Like why is there any value in that discussion?

The rest of us still can't prove we our conscious, either.. remember?

It's just someone noticed that people are not happy with GPT5 release and came up with an apple-to-screech-owl comparison (two completely different kinds of models, one product ready and the other internal test only) to farm clicks.

Why bother with substance in the era of vibes?

A substack article? Zero substance? Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat

:(

I agree that they don't have other revenue paths and think that's a big issue for them. I disagree that this means they care about their original mission though; I think they're struggling to replicate their original insane step function model improvements and other players have caught up.

If you liked the general analysis of OpenAI and the AI space, you may appreciate https://open.substack.com/pub/theahura/p/tech-things-gemini-... Or https://open.substack.com/pub/theahura/p/tech-things-gpt-pro...

Which focus much more on macro analysis and less on memes

Is this a bit? Are you channeling your inner Jeff Albertson? I don’t feel like this is even real. Almost like a response from Gemini itself to give a parody anecdote about itself.

What are you talking about? Gemini 2.5 Pro with it's large context window was for months the best model, only surpassed by Claude Sonnet 4. https://polymarket.com/event/which-company-has-best-ai-model...

These models aren't rigorously deriving the future state of a system from a quantitative model based in physical theories. Their understanding of the natural environment around is in line the innate understanding that animals and humams have that is based on the experience of living in an environment that follows deterministic patterns. It is easy learn that a river flows faster in the middle by empirical observation. But that is not correlated with a deeper understanding of hydrodynmics.

If you watched Ex Machina, there was a little twist at the end, which basically showed that she ("it," really) was definitely a machine, and had no human "drivers."

I thought that was a clever stroke, and probably a good comment on how we'll be perceiving machines; and how they'll be perceiving us.

I don't know how one would think doomers "ignore image and video AI models". They (Yudkowsky, Hinton, Kokotajlo, Scott Alexander) point at these things all the time.

We already automate away all possible human interaction. Maybe in the future we can automate away our senses themselves.

My roommate already looks at his weather app to see what to wear instead of putting his hand out the window. Simulating the weather instead of experiencing it is just the next logical step

Tbh I picked possibly the least offensive definition for agi I could think of, since I mostly agree with other comments that it's entirely semantic. I've written in the past that I think we've already hit AGI for any reasonable definitions of "artificial", "general", and "intelligence"

We reached AGI about 30 years ago then

That certainly how it feels to me. Every demo seems like it's presenting some kind of socially maladjusted silicon valley nerd's wet dream. Half of it doesn't interest non tech people, the other half seems designed for teenagers.

Look at this image of Zuckerberg demoing his new product: https://imgur.com/1naGLfp

Or gpt5 press release: "look at this shitty game it made", "look at the bars on this graph showing how we outperform some other model by 2% in a benchmark that doesn't actually represent anything"

lol. The definition of AGI seems to change on the daily, and usually coincides with whatever the describer is trying to sell.

Honestly, same. Anthropic CEO radiates good vibes.

[dead]

I like how we've just collectively forgotten about the absolutely disastrous initial release of Gemini. Were the people responsible for that fired? Are they still still there making decisions? Why should I ever trust them and give them a second chance when I could just choose to use a competitor that doesn't have that history?

Genie 3 just had the Sora treatment.

Lots of press for something by invitation only.

This probably means it takes an incredible amount of resources to power in its current form. Possibly tens of H100s (or TPUs) simultaneously. It'll take time to turn that from a wasteful tech preview into a scaleable product.

But it's clearly impressive, and it did the job of making what OpenAI did look insignificant.

Basically free advertising for something not released.