> For an industry that’s stagnant in progress

Surely you're not talking about the AI industry. Astra was released less than 3 weeks ago, and Fable-level models became public only 6 months ago. The rate of change is dizzying.

▲

Lalabadie 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I get the perspective from which you're making that statement, but the industry keeps moving its own goalposts.

Change is fast and abundant, and at the same time, it is hilariously more mundane than the dangerous-AGI-in-six-months tune we've been reading daily for years.

I would define it as a quick-moving market, but not nearly moving enough for the fantastic claims they make to justify ever-increasing funding.

	▲	a2dam 16 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		AI, if not AGI, has certainly become uniquely dangerous in the past 6 months though. We have a lot of evidence to that effect. The best case scenario is a situation like Y2K: a ton of people coordinate and work hard to produce no perceptible change, because unlike catastrophe, averting catastrophe feels boring.
	▲	nonethewiser 16 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		>Change is fast and abundant, and at the same time, it is hilariously more mundane than the dangerous-AGI-in-six-months tune we've been reading daily for years. Absolutely none of this points to “stagnant.” Stagnant is a terrible description of the AI industry.

▲

talon8635 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s a hypothetical statement that seems to have confused a lot of people.

I’m not saying it is stagnant. I’m saying for a hypothetical industry that was (maybe that fits AI, maybe not, I have zero authority to say myself)…

▲

koyote 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And yet they have only improved marginally in my use cases since around Opus 4.5.

The harnesses have improved somewhat, but the code produced on large or legacy code bases is still very average and I still see similar mistakes made that I saw back a year ago (although less now that harnesses have become better at steering).

For my use cases, we are definitely on the flatter part of the curve at the moment.

	▲	a2dam 16 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		This is wild to me, but to each their own. Mythos-class stuff is insanely better at nearly everything than Opus 4.5 was in my experience.
	▲	Grimblewald 14 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Same experience here, anything frontier human knowledge wise, same if not a regression. For human understanding and emotional intelligence, for many tasks regressiin is so bad that many near anchient llama era models now beat frontier anthropic/oai models. Notable exceptions to capability rot seem to be qwen models, and previously deepseek but the latest gen of models has started showing the same rot. General writing quality is down significantly accross the board, often it is outright ass. For example, I didnt mind reading 4.5's outout, but opus 5 makes me goddamn near violent, its fucking insufferable.