Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Grandpa, what did you do with the 100 hours you had access to artificial superintelligence in the second week of June, 2026?
English
Super Dario
9.8K posts
@inductionheads Nah look outside coding and the gemini models have been pretty decent.
Solid in voice, image, video
TPUs power most things at 1m context
Money to burn competitors inference compensation budgets into the ground.
own 16% anthropic
theyll be fine / do well
English
@SebastienBubeck @jasondeanlee Was obviously in the training data doc
English
Well, the human record of 2.29 didn't last very long. @jasondeanlee used the double cycle cover prompt to get to 2.28 and with 8 (EIGHT!) hours of further thinking GPT-5.6 got it down to 2.26 and wrote a paper on it: dropbox.com/scl/fi/6zqstz2…
Sebastien Bubeck@SebastienBubeck
English
@GarciaCap If you can get one of these
sanmartinwatchstore.com/products/san-m…
English
Horology Twitter, I need your opinion.
1) Timex Q GMT - $208 (new)
• Ultra-budget GMT homage
• Quartz movement
• 38mm case, 12.5mm thick
• Acrylic crystal, 50m WR
2) Timex Waterbury GMT - $569 (new)
• Affordable mechanical GMT upgrade
• Automatic movement (Japanese)
• 41.5mm case, 14mm thick
• Mineral crystal, 50m WR
3) Tudor Black Bay GMT - $3,400 (used)
• Premium Swiss tool watch value
• Automatic movement (in-house MT5652, COSC)
• 41mm case, 14.6mm thick
• Sapphire crystal, 200m WR
4) Rolex GMT-Master II - $13,000 (used)
• Iconic prestige GMT benchmark
• Automatic movement (Caliber 3285)
• 40mm case, 12.4mm thick
• Sapphire crystal with Cyclops, 100m WR
I’m leaning towards the Timex Waterbury GMT at $569, it’s a big upgrade from the Timex Q without the sticker price of the Tudor and Rolex.
To be fair, Rolex is only here for comparison, I would rather invest the money.
Do you own any of these watches? Which would you pick? 🤔
English
Super Dario retweetledi
this has been a labor of love for months with @mikasenghaas and @xeophon driving incredible progress, and `v1` is now finally ready for prime time
we set out to fully modernize `verifiers` for the agent harness era, and unlocked some insane efficiency gains along the way
Prime Intellect@PrimeIntellect
Today, we are releasing verifiers v1 — an overhaul of our environment stack for the modern era of agentic RL and evals. We decompose environments into a taskset, a harness, and a runtime. Run complex agentic tasks like coding and computer use at scale, in any harness.
English
Super Dario retweetledi
The gains are much higher than 50%.
We will be publishing detailed metrics soon on Vera CPUs.
Beth Kindig@Beth_Kindig
AI startup Perplexity is planning to use Nvidia’s new standalone Vera CPUs, with the company saying it found that Vera carried out agenting coding tasks 1.5X faster than traditional CPUs. $NVDA $AMD
English
Super Dario retweetledi
🚨Good News: Former Nebraska Senator
Ben Sasse has announced during an interview this week that his tumors have shrunk by 80% thanks in part to a new cancer drug
Ben Sasse: “I'm down 99%, in five months, of how much cancer is in my blood.”
English
Super Dario retweetledi
One of the key architectural questions of the 21st century in business will be how you maximize your corporate IP in the form of decisions, insights, workflow patterns, and best practices in a world where so much intelligence is packed into AI models.
One might think these questions could just get bitter lessoned out of existence, but in reality they become even more germane as intelligence becomes more powerful. In a world where any firm also has access to frontier intelligence, understanding how you leverage it uniquely becomes a critical question.
That’s why so much value is left to be created between the enterprise and the underlying AI itself. Having evals for your workflows, ensuring that you can route models from different tiers of intelligence, capturing traces in a way that improve your own workflows, and making sure the value of your information compounds as AI gets better all become critical considerations.
Which is also why there’s so much opportunity right now in the applied AI layer. The companies that help figure this out for other enterprises will be in the best position to win the next enterprise workloads.
Satya Nadella@satyanadella
English
Super Dario retweetledi
Super Dario retweetledi
Try Grok 4.5 in Perplexity
Perplexity@perplexity_ai
Grok 4.5 is now available as an orchestrator model in Computer for Consumer Pro and Max subscribers. We evaluated it against five other orchestrator configurations on WANDR. It scored higher than every other configuration at roughly half the cost of Opus 4.8.
English
Super Dario retweetledi
Super Dario retweetledi
I don’t know who needs to hear this, but there is an identically 0% chance Fable ever goes pay per use only
Prajwal Tomar@PrajwalTomar_
Fable 5 goes pay per use in 2 days. Make it train its replacement before it does. Have Fable 5 write Skills for the models you'll actually keep using, so its judgment stays even after the model goes behind credits. The best version from the thread: tell Fable it's "a retiring principal engineer" leaving a complete skill library behind for the team. → It audits your repo like an incoming senior engineer → Writes 10-16 SKILL files: debugging playbook, change rules, the failure stories that cost real time → Opus and Sonnet then run that playbook on cheaper sessions, at Fable's standard Fair warning from the thread: the run can eat 30% of your weekly Fable usage. Still worth it. Full prompt in comment 1, my Fable 5 playbook below. Bookmark this.
English
Super Dario retweetledi
Why AI makes jobs instead of loses them.
1. There are more profitable ideas/projects than time, talent, and general resources there are to realize them.
2. AI lowers the talent and resources bar substantially leading to more ideas becoming reality.
3. Successful idea/project = more wealth, more work, and more jobs.
The reason why so many people made the mistake of thinking it gets rid of jobs is they see a fixed pie. But in reality we are growing the pie. AI is really only bearish labor for bloated mismanaged incumbents not the entire economy.
English
Super Dario retweetledi
Super Dario retweetledi
Pretraining scale originally mattered for fitting the curve of human language at ever higher resolution, but now matters more as neural capacity for sample efficient latent reasoning, long-horizon planning, and other capabilities absorbed through post-training.
This makes it harder to simply buy your way to the frontier with compute scale. All the low-hanging webcrawl data have been picked. The data needed for post-training is much closer to a kind of "learning by doing" bootstrapped from tons of diverse reward environments and user-agent OODA loops. This requires running billions, maybe trillions of micro-experiments. The $60b SpaceX / Cursor acquisition illustrates just how lucrative and expensive this sort of data is getting.
Outside of model distillation, you can't simply "jump to the end" and zero-to-one a frontier agent from scratch. Like a child growing into an adult, you have to climb the developmental ladder rung by rung. This creates a compounding advantage to the companies already in the lead, and helps explain why Meta has struggled to catch-up in spite of their impressive compute stockpile. And as we inch closer to RSI, these incumbent advantages only intensify.
Alexandr Wang@alexandr_wang
compute daddy @dylan522p has spoken
English
Super Dario retweetledi
Something strange has happened over the last 10 years
When I was a kid, every tech publication (Wired, TechCrunch, Engadget) truly loved and celebrated technology
Over the last 10 years they all collectively decided they absolutely LOATHE technology.
Every article is a hit piece. Every entrepreneur and creative thinker is being destroyed. The greatest inventors of our lives are being villainized.
A lot of people are saying it’s because we live in a clickbait culture and hate is what drive clicks, but I don’t buy it
If hate drove clicks all of these publications would be thriving. Instead, they’re all failing, going bankrupt, laying people off and on top of that I literally can’t name a single person who reads any of them
There is a such a massive opportunity right now for anyone who’s willing to start a tech publication that actually celebrates and loves technology.
I’m DYING for a version of Wired that actually covers real tech with an optimistic lens, and I know many other are too.
Might have to f around and do this myself.
dar@radbackwards
I gave WIRED the exclusive on our hands launch, and they wrote a really weird article about how we are sexualizing robotics… wired.com/story/the-1x-n… I felt pretty betrayed because that’s not what they told me they were writing about not is that what I’ve ever been about… actually I stand for quite the opposite… But I’ve come to find a lot of dishonesty and malice in the journalism community so I wasn’t surprised. This is what I sent the author… I’m only sharing this because I hope it encourages journalists to resist the click bait trap and tell truly awesome stories because I for one don’t believe journalism is dead— I think it’s just starting and just needs to evolve past the weird corner of the internet where data driven optimization turns everything into smooth brained shocking brain rot bullshit. The technological revolution we are going through should inspire a journalism renaissance. Not let it fall into further decay. There is so much brilliance at play in the world and the stories should be told! My note: “[author name redacted], it was nice talking to you, but I wanted to let you know that I didn’t enjoy your article at all. I understand the need to be inflammatory because that seems to be the only thing that gets clicks these days but that doesnt mean you shouldn’t recognize when something special is in front of you. I trusted our PR team in saying we should offer you the exclusive on what is one of the most important technological developments in the history of Mankind and I deeply regret it. Good luck with the rest of your writing career. -Dar Sleeper”
English
TBPN@tbpn
.@ericries explains why former Costco CEO Jim Sinegal refused to raise the price of everything in the store by $.03, despite the fact that Costco knew it wouldn't decrease sales, and would increase their net income by 50%: "He says, 'It's like the business equivalent of taking heroin. You do it once, and then you got to do it again, and again, and again. Next thing you know, you're not the low-price leader.'" "You can get away with screwing people over. You always do it, no matter what. You raise margins. Margins are a source of strength." "But Costco is built on a very different philosophy, which is that margins can be a source of weakness. @JeffBezos understood it. He used to always say, 'Your margin is my opportunity.'" "When you're making too much money, when you are being too extractive, you're actually harming your competitive position in the long run." From his appearance on the show in May.
ZXX
Super Dario retweetledi
.@ericries explains why former Costco CEO Jim Sinegal refused to raise the price of everything in the store by $.03, despite the fact that Costco knew it wouldn't decrease sales, and would increase their net income by 50%:
"He says, 'It's like the business equivalent of taking heroin. You do it once, and then you got to do it again, and again, and again. Next thing you know, you're not the low-price leader.'"
"You can get away with screwing people over. You always do it, no matter what. You raise margins. Margins are a source of strength."
"But Costco is built on a very different philosophy, which is that margins can be a source of weakness. @JeffBezos understood it. He used to always say, 'Your margin is my opportunity.'"
"When you're making too much money, when you are being too extractive, you're actually harming your competitive position in the long run."
From his appearance on the show in May.
English
Super Dario retweetledi
if you only learned about jevons paradox primarily wrt software demand in the age of agentic engineering, you may not have fully internalized jevons parodox’s impact under the conditions of:
- humans who can wield coding agents well*
- coding agents breaking containment to all other knowledge work
as the efficiency of labor goes up/unit cost of knowledge work goes broadly down, the demand for total work and better knowledge goes up, not down.
what happened to coding isnt the exception; it’s the herald.
*aka AI Engineers
Sam Altman@sama
so far at least, i'm pretty sure AI has been net job-creating. this was not what i expected--although i was much less pessimistic than others, i thought by this level of capability we'd have seen some impact. it is possible this direction keeps going!
English