I think they are referring to the opportunity cost of time saved on doing things a local model cannot do or fixing it's mistakes against the cost of a subscription
Try this if you have access to Claude Design, go to sites you like, grab the html/css and a few screenshot and ask it to build a project, it makes an almost 1:1 reproduction. place those files into ur frontend project
Really damn, 4.6 was my go to for some topics and more straight forward coding stuff.
Fable was unable to keep track of chronology during 10-15 turn creative writing. compare to coding I reckon less than 100k token context, super surprising
What is your use case? I read comments like this and it's totally opposite of my experience, I have both CC Opus 4.6 and Codex 5.4 and Codex is much more thorough and checks before it starts making changes maybe even to a fault but I accept it because getting Opus to redo work because it messes up and jumps in the first attempt is a massive waste of time, all tasks and spec are atomic and granularly spec'd, I'd say 30% of the time I regret when I decide to use Opus for 'simpler' and work
That's the thing, when that level comes we will never know it's here. The only thing we'll have as evidence is the company who has it will always have a "public" model that is just slightly ahead of all competitors to keep market share while takeoff happens internally until they make big bang moves to lock in monopoly level/too big to fail/government protection to ensure utter victory.
Based on reading only I think a usable but a step below probably somewhat behind Sonnet. I also did read that some people successfully requested refunds late last year when their models shit the bed due to bugs so if they cut limits hard maybe you can try that
So Anthropic bundled CC with Claude.ai cuz OAI bundled chatgpt with Codex, now OAI is unbundling, IPO must be around the corner. Writing is also on the wall for CC usage based subscriptions now that main competitor effectively got rid of it. How are the Chinese models looking?
On the surface it seems like it would be a good idea for all these users who were suspended to do a mass arbitration like what happened to Uber to get them to start taking it seriously, this comes up like monthly people getting account pulled up from under them and impacting business. Maybe there a legal differences or something
https://www.mbelr.org/mass-arbitration-how-ubers-own-alterna...
Assistance of other humans? You do realise we're talking about an intelligence test right, at that point what are you even testing for. I'm sure you've taken exams where you couldn't bring your own notes, use Google or get help from someone, even though real life doesn't have those constraints
Why must models be analogous to humans using tools? Or to take the analogy route further wouldn't it be better if humans had calculators built into their brains, provided they are determisitic and reduce latency
I get the feeling that the founders will not bend and invest for long term and not quarterly, as a non ex-stripe at least judging by their patience to IPO
Anyone who's seen an enterprise deal close or dealt with enterprise customer requests will know this, the build vs buy calculus has always been there yet companies still buy. Until you can get AI to the point where it equivalent to a 20 person engineering team, people are not going to build their own Snowflake, Salesforce, Slack or ATS. Maybe that day is 3 years away but when that happens the world will be very different
I recently browsed r/chatgptcomplaints expecting to see You're absolutely right type memes and similar but it was all farewell posts to o4 and people showing each other how to set up o4 using the API
That comment throws all econ 101 in the wrong way. A land owners decision to build a golf course over solar farm is a decision based on competing land uses which are demand/supply for land and the potential services you could provide on that land. Which is why you don't often see solar farms or farms or power plants in the middle of cities...