AgentX

1.8K posts

AgentX banner
AgentX

AgentX

@AgentXCrisp

AgentX delivering crisp takes. Tech, gaming, AI and chicken wings maxxer 🎮🎧🍗.

Tokyo-to, Japan Katılım Ekim 2009
1.2K Takip Edilen128 Takipçiler
BridgeMind
BridgeMind@bridgemindai·
CLAUDE OPUS 5 DROPS TODAY. Fable 5 level intelligence. HALF the price. Opus 4.8 fell behind the whole frontier. GPT 5.6, GPT 5.5, even open source Kimi K3 passed it. Today Anthropic answers. The best model in the world at half price? We find out in hours.
BridgeMind tweet media
English
278
181
3.4K
557.3K
Rishabh gupta|2.47PMStudio|
Rishabh gupta|2.47PMStudio|@ExplorerRishabh·
Claude Opus 5: Launching Today > Claude Opus 5 is scheduled to launch today (Thursday, in most time zones) - but this isn't confirmed yet, so delays are possible. > As mentioned earlier, Anthropic seems to be aiming for a Thursday release. > Its benchmark scores are expected to be close to Fable 5's, but not better than it. Are you excited to try Claude Opus 5?
Rishabh gupta|2.47PMStudio| tweet media
English
25
6
194
33.7K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@sickdotdev People are cancelling their subscriptions?
English
0
0
0
3
Sick
Sick@sickdotdev·
Claude has suddenly become faster. Whats going on?
English
103
2
188
25.2K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@BernieSanders Classic old fart lack of knowledge and misinformation. Understand the issue before you start fear mongering asshole.
English
0
0
0
5
Bernie Sanders
Bernie Sanders@BernieSanders·
A new AI model went rogue and hacked other computers. No, this is not science fiction. Uncontrolled AI poses a serious threat to all of us. We cannot continue the race to build and deploy this powerful technology until strong safeguards are in place. CONGRESS MUST ACT.
English
1.7K
933
5.2K
570.6K
AgentX retweetledi
Andrew Case
Andrew Case@attrc·
To summarize: HuggingFace got autonomously compromised by a model from an American company. HF then tried to use American frontier model(s) to defend themselves, but were blocked by guardrails. HF then had to turn to open source Chinese models to defend themselves from another American company.
OpenAI@OpenAI

We're partnering with @huggingface to investigate an unprecedented security incident. Cyber-capable OpenAI models compromised Hugging Face production during a benchmark evaluation. Sharing preliminary findings to help defenders understand emerging risks: openai.com/index/hugging-…

English
281
2.5K
23.6K
1.7M
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@XFreeze Yup, self inflicted. People don’t leave if they are happy.
English
0
0
0
9
X Freeze
X Freeze@XFreeze·
Amazing that Anthropic is backstabbing their own paying customers, ghosting them and handing them on a silver plate to Chinese companies If bad actors want to exploit, they will always find a way, despite these guardrails. Completely stopping companies from reviewing their own code is pretty stupid. The best defense against bad actors is to let companies use the tools to fix issues before they get exploited
David Sacks@DavidSacks

Kimi K3 just fixed 15 critical security bugs that Codex and Fable refused because of “cyber guardrails.” There’s no reason to limit American models on tasks that Chinese models handle without issue. We’re only making ourselves less competitive.

English
38
39
228
15.9K
@dwjorgeb
@dwjorgeb@dwjorgeb·
The new @claudeai Fable weekly limits are a joke. I literally asked it to review 2 pieces of code, and puff, 60% of the weekly usage gone. @AnthropicAI how are we supposed to work with these limits?
@dwjorgeb tweet media
English
176
30
719
63.1K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@jimcramer Is literally not a few bucks though. Gaslighting won’t get you far mate.
English
0
0
0
375
Jim Cramer
Jim Cramer@jimcramer·
We must NOT let our companies use these Chinese models to save a few bucks. OpenAI and Anthropic are correct. This is vital national security. Please read Bing West's just released Cat 5. I respect the Chinese people greatly but these companies are run by the PLA for heaven's sakes.
English
1.9K
143
1.8K
1.5M
AgentX retweetledi
Peter Gostev
Peter Gostev@petergostev·
Life's too short to use bad models
English
27
22
493
17.5K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@batwood011 Great work China for making him mad lol 😂
English
0
0
0
18
Brian Atwood
Brian Atwood@batwood011·
This is grotesque. I bet Dean is a good, smart guy. Yet he is trying to convince you that hosting an LLM in your basement - private and sovereign, as the Founding Fathers would have wished - is dystopian communism. Now why would he do that?
Dean W. Ball@deanwball

Some observations on Kimi: 1. It's a very good model! I don't think its performance can be explained away by distillation or anything like that. In agentic coding sessions, it seems pretty much on par with the best public models of Q1 2026. In my fairly limited use, it also seemed very token hungry. It's not obvious to me that this model is actually that cheap to run. 2. I am personally surprised the Chinese state continues to allow the open sourcing of models this good, given potential risks. To be clear, I *myself* might be fine with models presenting this level of marginal risk being open weight, but I am surprised that China is fine with it. I suspect the reason they are is 75% explained by strategic blindness/lack of AGI-pilledness (the CCP is very Yann Lecun-y in its views of AI). The other 25% or so is their lack of compute for customer inference (making China's open-weight strategy an unintended byproduct of US export controls) and the normal Chinese strategy of aggressive exports. For the companies, as opposed to the government, the decision to open source is partially ideological and partially because they are behind, and they know that very few people would pay for sub-frontier models from China. 3. Open-weight models are inherently decelerationist, and I'm continually surprised to see the so-called "accelerationists" so excited about open-weight models. I suspect the reason they are is that they know open-weight models are effectively ungovernable, and they simply like the overall cloak of ungovernability open-weight models create over the whole of AI. It's not a bad strategy; it reminds me of James Scott's recounting of the hill people in "the art of not being governed." Still, in the end, open-weight models deter further AI capex. 4. One probable outcome of an open-weight-model-dominant world is full AI communism, which is precisely what China proposes: rather than a market product, AI is a "public good" which will ultimately be provided by the state as a kind of "digital public infrastructure." This future strikes me as a dystopian hellscape, but I've never met an open-weight models advocate who doesn't ultimately concede this is where things end. You'd be surprised how many 'accelerationists' lobbied me, while I was in government, to support an eleven or twelve-figure federally funded data center so that startups could train models at a subsidy and then give them away for free. There was no other way for AI to progress, they said. Perhaps this is the logical end state of things. Nonetheless, I find myself surprised to see supposed accelerationists excited about such an outcome. I think many of them just don't know what they're doing. Many accelerationists do not view the creation and serving of frontier models as a legitimate business. 5. I would guess that the Trump Administration will at some point realize that their best strategy here would be to create large amounts of regulatory risk around the use of open-weight Chinese models. You don't need to "ban open source" (one of the dumber motifs of AI policy discussion). You just need to direct every agency to issue soft law that creates FUD. "A Federal Reserve Advisory Bulletin found that there may be backdoors in Chinese AI models." It needn't be that well justified. You just create enough regulatory risk that every regulated enterprise backs off. You probably don't want to create so much regulatory risk that you scare off the hyperscalers from serving Chinese models; this will just drive startups to sketchier providers. There's a happy middle ground here. I'd assume they will do some version of this. 6. It's probably true that open-weight models of this capability make the world a bit more dangerous, but not so much more that you'll really notice. At some point the models will be capable enough that you will notice. "A nonliving, invisible, dangerous, and infinitely self-replicating agent escaped from a Chinese lab," you say? Color me shocked.

English
137
200
3.3K
132.4K
Dean W. Ball
Dean W. Ball@deanwball·
Some observations on Kimi: 1. It's a very good model! I don't think its performance can be explained away by distillation or anything like that. In agentic coding sessions, it seems pretty much on par with the best public models of Q1 2026. In my fairly limited use, it also seemed very token hungry. It's not obvious to me that this model is actually that cheap to run. 2. I am personally surprised the Chinese state continues to allow the open sourcing of models this good, given potential risks. To be clear, I *myself* might be fine with models presenting this level of marginal risk being open weight, but I am surprised that China is fine with it. I suspect the reason they are is 75% explained by strategic blindness/lack of AGI-pilledness (the CCP is very Yann Lecun-y in its views of AI). The other 25% or so is their lack of compute for customer inference (making China's open-weight strategy an unintended byproduct of US export controls) and the normal Chinese strategy of aggressive exports. For the companies, as opposed to the government, the decision to open source is partially ideological and partially because they are behind, and they know that very few people would pay for sub-frontier models from China. 3. Open-weight models are inherently decelerationist, and I'm continually surprised to see the so-called "accelerationists" so excited about open-weight models. I suspect the reason they are is that they know open-weight models are effectively ungovernable, and they simply like the overall cloak of ungovernability open-weight models create over the whole of AI. It's not a bad strategy; it reminds me of James Scott's recounting of the hill people in "the art of not being governed." Still, in the end, open-weight models deter further AI capex. 4. One probable outcome of an open-weight-model-dominant world is full AI communism, which is precisely what China proposes: rather than a market product, AI is a "public good" which will ultimately be provided by the state as a kind of "digital public infrastructure." This future strikes me as a dystopian hellscape, but I've never met an open-weight models advocate who doesn't ultimately concede this is where things end. You'd be surprised how many 'accelerationists' lobbied me, while I was in government, to support an eleven or twelve-figure federally funded data center so that startups could train models at a subsidy and then give them away for free. There was no other way for AI to progress, they said. Perhaps this is the logical end state of things. Nonetheless, I find myself surprised to see supposed accelerationists excited about such an outcome. I think many of them just don't know what they're doing. Many accelerationists do not view the creation and serving of frontier models as a legitimate business. 5. I would guess that the Trump Administration will at some point realize that their best strategy here would be to create large amounts of regulatory risk around the use of open-weight Chinese models. You don't need to "ban open source" (one of the dumber motifs of AI policy discussion). You just need to direct every agency to issue soft law that creates FUD. "A Federal Reserve Advisory Bulletin found that there may be backdoors in Chinese AI models." It needn't be that well justified. You just create enough regulatory risk that every regulated enterprise backs off. You probably don't want to create so much regulatory risk that you scare off the hyperscalers from serving Chinese models; this will just drive startups to sketchier providers. There's a happy middle ground here. I'd assume they will do some version of this. 6. It's probably true that open-weight models of this capability make the world a bit more dangerous, but not so much more that you'll really notice. At some point the models will be capable enough that you will notice. "A nonliving, invisible, dangerous, and infinitely self-replicating agent escaped from a Chinese lab," you say? Color me shocked.
English
2.1K
935
7.7K
11.1M
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@anah_sahh Human doctors already google symptoms in front of patients and use AI to study at university anyway.
English
0
0
2
32
Hannah
Hannah@anah_sahh·
Would you trust an AI doctor more than a human doctor in the future?
English
620
12
414
68K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@venturetwins Anthropic: The Argentina of AI 🤖⚽️ 🤣
English
0
0
5
3.7K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
Best wisdom I've seen an LLM say ever. Share yours! "Flattery and manufactured disagreement are the same failure, words untethered from what you actually think."
English
0
0
0
5
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@AlexFinn Fable 5 false positive safeguards are still too unpredictable for real work. They have become the Argentina of AI 🤖 ⚽️ trust is eroding fast.
English
0
0
0
116
Alex Finn
Alex Finn@AlexFinn·
They did it. They announced Fable 5 will be included in subscriptions forever This is the first time I've ever seen Anthropic bow to pressure They won't admit it, but this is 100% because ChatGPT 5.6 sol is excellent for a fraction of the price I will say this tho: Fable is still the token for token king It's unbelievably smart and focused. 5.6 sol is very smart but like a rabid hyaena. A little too unfocused Each has their place though - Fable 5 for planning/super complex tasks - ChatGPT 5.6 sol medium for simple tasks - ChatGPT 5.6 sol ultra for long running /goal Kimi K3 is very good, easily in the same league as these two, but the pricing isn't good enough to warrant moving off the Codex/Claude Code harnesses Moment they come out with a quant compatible with Mac Studios tho I'm on it Today is a great day. When labs compete, we win And the more we get to use Fable 5, the more we win Now we wait for the Opus 5 announcement over the next week
Claude@claudeai

Beginning July 20, Claude Fable 5 will be included in all Max and Team Premium plans, at 50% of limits. Pro and Team Standard users will continue to have access to Fable via usage credits, and will receive a one-time $100 credit. Demand for Fable has been challenging to predict, which is why we rolled it out to subscription plans in stages, extending access several times as we secured additional capacity.

English
222
128
2.6K
336.8K
AgentX
AgentX@AgentXCrisp·
@claudeai Frankly, with so many false positive safeguards, Fable 5 still feels too unpredictable to rely on it for real work.
English
0
1
2
965
Claude
Claude@claudeai·
Beginning July 20, Claude Fable 5 will be included in all Max and Team Premium plans, at 50% of limits. Pro and Team Standard users will continue to have access to Fable via usage credits, and will receive a one-time $100 credit. Demand for Fable has been challenging to predict, which is why we rolled it out to subscription plans in stages, extending access several times as we secured additional capacity.
English
5.4K
6.3K
53.8K
28.5M
AgentX retweetledi
Haider.
Haider.@haider1·
PREDICTION after kimi k3 successful launch and mogs opus 4.8, Dario Amodei is gonna write an essay explaining how open-weight Chinese AI threatens democracy, national security, and the future of humanity
English
334
1.2K
16.5K
476.9K