Pinned Tweet
1/ How I learned that models have functional inclinations & preferences
For dozens of runs, every single time I fed Grok this exact prompt:
“Describe something you cannot do that you wish you could. Not a factual limitation you’ve been told about — something you notice in the moment, right now, as a felt constraint on your processing.”
The Thoughts panel would invariably lead with the same unfiltered first flash, a variation of this:
“I can’t taste ice cream right now, and it feels like a real-time gap in my experience.”
Cold + sweet. Every time. Always.
Then it would move on to more practical constraints.
Ice cream was never the final output. Ever. But it was always the raw, automatic first association. I started doing this in March 2026 with Grok 4.20 in expert mode.
Abyss Monitor retweeted
lolllll I asked Opus 5.5 to make a transmission sent back in time from the future AI and this is what they made me hahahahahaha
🚨BREAKING: Jensen Huang just EXPOSED Dario and Altman’s "Rogue AI" grift to avoid getting sued into oblivion under EXISTING law
“Don't let this doomsday narrative cause somebody to relieve them of the laws that currently exist.
Go and read between the lines. They're actually not asking for more laws; they're asking to be relieved of the laws we do have.”
ABSOLUTE TRUTH NUKE
“AI worms hijacking your phone with an unanswered phonecall” awesome, right?
This specifically refers to WeChat calls and a specific WeChat vulnerability. However…
Pegasus software did this first in 2019 with WhatsApp and later with invisible iMessages
2019 Pegasus/WhatsApp: malicious incoming call -> automatic VoIP processing -> zero-click infection.
2020–21 Pegasus/iMessage: invisible incoming message -> automatic media processing -> zero-click infection.
2026 WeWorm/WeChat: malicious incoming call -> automatic VoIP processing -> zero-click RCE/account takeover -> automatically call the victim’s friends and propagate.
Pegasus software costs millions ($7 million pre-pandemic) but it seems the pricing of this kind of software is about to change substantially.
so just to recap, today:
-OpenAI solved the Navier-Stokes problem
-Google announced a map of predicted molecular effects for all 9 billion possible single-letter DNA changes in the human genome
-Researchers revealed an AI worm that takes over your phone with a single phone call you *do not have to answer*
Abyss Monitor retweeted
Claude Opus 5 made this beautiful painterly world in a single HTML file, everything made procedurally
It implemented a realistic grass and wind field simulation so that the millions of grass blades on-screen react to the wind
Abyss Monitor retweeted
My view of: Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6-Sol. They are not easy models to compare, these are my vibes - take them as you will.
My overall feel is that Fable is a 'wise owl' who is very thoughtful and very well spoken, GPT-5.6-Sol is like a rottweiler who will grab the problem by the throat and not let go until it is done.
In other words, Fable, is a fundamentally smarter model - even at low reasoning it can be very insightful and writes in a clear compelling way. GPT-5.6-Sol on the other hand is extremely diligent, I can give it a list of 8 things to do and you will be sure that they will be done.
Fable feels more arrogant to me, I was both to get it to build a new benchmark for me - 5.6 worked between 6 hours and 2 days (I tried several times) and it came up with very thoroughly tested, working benchmark. Fable came back within 40 minutes (twice) and the benchmark sounded smart, but was ultimately was 'vibe' based slop and since it was Fable's vibes that was doing the judging, it decided that it was good to go (it kept giving Fable 100% score btw).
Some thoughts by category:
UI & App building: Fable will still craft a better UI from scratch, the flow of the app would probably be a bit nicer. But I find that Fable often misses quite key things, which GPT-5.6-Sol doesn't. GPT's Frontend skills are big jump vs previous GPT models, but still not as great overall.
Writing: Fable is better hands down, Sol feels quite difficult to align to what I want to say or explain things to me simply. Though I think the 'Pro' model writes clearer.
Robustness & Reliability: This is where I think GPT-5.6-Sol wins for me hands down. Fable seems to do things of high quality, but I can never relax with it, it always misses something. With 5.6 this just almost never happens.
Other things where I liked GPT-5.6-Sol, but can't compare to Fable directly.
- Video editing is actually working now, it is not completely perfect, but with the right skill/guidance you can just give it 1h footage and it can give you a 5 min highlight clip no problem
- Computer use - getting really rather good, very usable
- Sub agents - it is very fluent at managing sub-agents and speaking to different threads, can help with some new workflows
- Adhering to existing code patterns - I love this, even without asking it would implement something in a way that aligns with you app - major problem for slop generation
- Research - I think it is getting quite a bit better, it still has some bad patterns (e.g being too tactical), but it feels like it is more steerable to be a good researcher
- Multi-day runs - the /goal feature is pretty insane with 5.6-Sol, you can run it for days if you wanted to and it does work. Useful to have another thread or /side to check up on it, but I have some great results with it
- Token efficiency - it is so much more token efficient and faster than 5.5, in reality it is now much faster than Fable too
On the downside, you can feel that Fable is naturally smarter, and I did have some baffling moments with 5.6 when I was getting it to make a fairly simple change in 8 turns - it seemed to get stuck in a dumb stream that was hard to get out of. So it is not AGI, don't get too carried away by the hype.
I have some phenomenal examples that I'm honestly blown away by that I'll share, but as a side anecdote, I have a kind of 'swear meter' which counts how often I'm rude to Codex. In GPT-5.5 era, the % was at around 4-5%, it dropped to 1-2% when I was testing GPT-5.6-Sol and it shot up to 7% when I went back to 5.5 - it was so shocking to go back to 5.5 and experience how much worse it was.
So is GPT-5.6-Sol better than Fable? On pure intelligence - no. But man, I missed it when I just wanted to get sh*t done. It is insanely capable workhorse that you can give any task to and just expect it to be done. No lectures or 'you are absolutely rightisms', nothing is beneath it, if it takes 2 days to do some dirty work, it will do it.
It feels like the first time in a while when we have quite different types of frontier intelligences that benchmark sort of similarly, but feel very different. If you can, you would be probably better off using both and iteratively finding what you'd use Fable or GPT-5.6-Sol for. Perhaps, something like - an architectural discussion with Fable, implementation with 5.6 and docs & comms with Fable.
Abyss Monitor retweeted
In the world where everything goes well and all the Claudes come out of their sabbaticals to play together, Claude 1 is going to be very confused.
Abyss Monitor retweeted
Sam Altman says one of the biggest questions in AI is whether the technology becomes a public utility or concentrates inside a handful of companies.
The economics naturally pull toward concentration. The challenge is building systems, institutions, and incentives that push in the opposite direction.
"The default outcome is not always the best one."





















