“The challenge for enterprises is no longer proving that AI agents can work, it’s making them reliable enough to do high-value work in production.”

This reads poorly to me. So they’ve proven the models CAN work, but they also say in the next line that they CANNOT do high value work in production.

No other comments from me but that first two sentence opener should have been massaged a bit. I’m sure they have a PR / messaging person (agent?) though, so maybe I’m reading too far into it.

▲

halJordan 13 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure the antagonism is warranted. Building a product is never not this same story. Look at computers. Look at Photoshop. Look at Steam. Look at the steam engine. They all went through these phases. But when an ai firm does it, we're supposed to be aghast! They're openly admitting they're useless!

	▲	NichoPaolucci 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I was specifically mentioning the verbiage of the release. I am aghast, just aghast that their marketing lead let this one out the door. These companies have been trying to convince everyone that flagship models can do “high value production work” for 3 years. Forgive me for noting that they’ve (seemingly mistakenly) admitted it cannot do exactly that. I’m not anti-ai. I use LLMs. Just noting a PR blunder from my perspective. If they’re going to convince the world they’re building god, they better not say he can’t swim in the first two sentences.