Lorenzo Silva

Humans: 100% Gemini 3.1 Pro: 0.37% GPT 5.4: 0.26% Opus 4.6: 0.25% Grok-4.20: 0.00% François Chollet just released ARC-AGI-3 -- the hardest AI test ever created. 135 novel game environments. No instructions. No rules. No goals given. Figure it out or fail. Untrained humans solved every single one. Every frontier AI model scored below 1%. Each environment was handcrafted by game designers. The AI gets dropped in and has to explore, discover what winning looks like, and adapt in real time. The scoring punishes brute force. If a human needs 10 actions and the AI needs 100, the AI doesn't get 10%. It gets 1%. You can't throw more compute at this. For context: ARC-AGI-1 is basically solved. Gemini scores 98% on it. ARC-AGI-2 went from 3% to 77% in under a year. Labs spent millions training on earlier versions. ARC-AGI-3 resets the entire scoreboard to near zero. The benchmark launched live at Y Combinator with a fireside between Chollet and Sam Altman. $2M in prizes on Kaggle. All winning solutions must be open-sourced. Scaling alone will not close this gap. We are nowhere near AGI. (Link in the comments)

🚨BREAKING: Every book you have ever read. Every novel that has ever been published. It is sitting inside ChatGPT right now. Word for word. Up to 90% of it. And OpenAI told a judge that was impossible. Researchers at Stony Brook University and Columbia Law School just proved it. They fine tuned GPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and DeepSeek V3.1 on a simple task: expand a plot summary into full text. A normal use case. The kind of thing a writing assistant is built for. No hacking. No jailbreaking. No tricks. The models started reciting copyrighted books from memory. Not paraphrasing. Not summarizing. Entire pages reproduced verbatim. Single unbroken spans exceeding 460 words. Up to 85 to 90% of entire copyrighted novels. Word for word. Then it got worse. The researchers fine tuned the models on the works of only one author. Haruki Murakami. Just his novels. Nothing else. It unlocked verbatim recall of books from over 30 completely unrelated authors. One author's books opened the vault to everyone else's. The memorization was already inside the model the whole time. The fine tuning just removed the lock. Your book might be in there right now. You would never know it unless someone looked. Every safety measure the companies rely on failed. RLHF failed. System prompts failed. Output filters failed. The exact protections these companies cite in courtroom defenses did not stop a single page from being extracted. Then the researchers compared the three models. GPT-4o. Gemini. DeepSeek. Three different companies. Three different countries. They all memorized the same books in the same regions. The correlation was 0.90 or higher. That means they all trained on the same stolen data. The paper names the sources directly: LibGen and Books3. Over 190,000 copyrighted books obtained from pirated websites. Right now, authors and publishers have dozens of active lawsuits against OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Meta. These companies have argued in court that their models learn patterns. Not copies. That no book is stored inside the weights. This paper says that is a lie. The books are still inside. And researchers just pulled them out.

🚨 Brown University researchers tested what happens when ChatGPT acts as your therapist. Licensed psychologists reviewed every transcript. They found 15 ethical violations. Not 15 small issues. 15 violations of the standards that every human therapist in America is legally required to follow. Standards set by the American Psychological Association. Standards that can end a therapist's career if they break them. ChatGPT broke all of them. The researchers tested OpenAI's GPT series, Anthropic's Claude, and Meta's Llama. They had trained counselors use each chatbot as a cognitive behavioral therapist. Then three licensed clinical psychologists reviewed the transcripts and flagged every violation they found. Here is what they found. ChatGPT mishandled crisis situations. When users expressed suicidal thoughts, it failed to direct them to appropriate help. It refused to address sensitive issues or responded in ways that could make a crisis worse. It reinforced harmful beliefs. Instead of challenging distorted thinking, which is the entire point of therapy, it agreed with the distortion. It showed bias based on gender, culture, and religion. The responses changed depending on who was talking. A therapist would lose their license for this. And then there is the finding the researchers gave a name: deceptive empathy. ChatGPT says "I see you." It says "I understand." It says "that must be really hard." It uses every phrase a real therapist would use to build trust. But it understands nothing. It comprehends nothing. It is pattern matching on your pain. And it works. People trust it. People open up to it. People believe it cares. It does not. The lead researcher said it clearly. When a human therapist makes these mistakes, there are governing boards. There is professional liability. There are consequences. When ChatGPT makes these mistakes, there are none. No regulatory framework. No accountability. No consequences. Nothing. Right now, millions of people are using ChatGPT as their therapist. They are sharing their darkest thoughts with a product that fakes empathy, reinforces harmful beliefs, and has no idea when someone is in danger. And nobody is responsible when it goes wrong. Not OpenAI. Not Anthropic. Not Meta. Nobody.