Building https://xitter.cf/t.co/fLae4gGo8V - AI & Media ex @huggingface @radiocanadainfo @ledevoir

Montreal
Joined February 2008
I put Jev 1.14’s new Box feature through a plane spotting test 10 photos, 3 airlines, 30 checks At a 50% presence threshold, Jev detected 10 of the 11 genuine airline appearances. 90.9% recall. 4 false positives and sometimes put the box in the wrong place
2
1
4
316
AI made newsjacking effortless. And creativity optional
1
325
Personal agent is the new chatbot
Here's everything that happened in Personal AI Agents this week from OpenAI, SpaceXSI, Meta, Google, Anthropic, OpenClaw, Nous Research, Perplexity, Manus, Genspark, Lindy, Underdog, MacPaw, Persona, and more. (save for later + share with your team) 🧵 Did I miss anything?
1
1
218
RIP test before merging?
1
251
Your regular reminder that small, specialized open models can do so much. Google dropped EmbeddingGemma 2. Then: - A dev built DigUp, which is basically what search on your Mac should be. - Google shipped Foresight, a local Granola-like
10
8
174
14,646
Some really good takes here
Assorted things I've been mulling over regarding agents in the economy: • Companies are in some sense the original superintelligence. It's often the case that they can use their amortized cognitive surplus to advance their interests against those of certain consumers: relative to the optimization capacity of companies, consumers can be inattentive, underinformed, irrational, etc. (Think, say, of some of the classic insurance upsells at the end of a booking process, which is typically priced substantially above what a regular policy would cost.) Herbert Simon introduced the idea of bounded rationality, and firms often end up benefiting from it. Thanks to personal agents, we will probably get somewhat more rational in how we engage with companies. • How exactly will outcomes change? Well, certain kinds of price discrimination will work less well (how do coupons work if every agent hunts fastidiously for them?), and certain kinds of customer cross-subsidy will change (today, people who forget to cancel subscriptions subsidize those who don't). Taken across the economy as a whole, I'm not sure what the incidence of all of this will be. • In corporate strategy, people have long debated the relative importance of distribution and product quality. Perhaps you've made something better, but does anyone know about it? Won't people just continue to buy the ACME Corp Mousetraps? Personal agents will, I think, act as a kind of structural subsidy for product quality. How would markets look different if individuals always spent at least 10 hours researching their purchases? On the margin, focusing on making a product better is, I think, going to become a more effective strategy for companies. This is good! • It true, a corollary is that information about product quality will become more important and impactful. Today, most people have very limited ability to aggregate and integrate such data, but agents will have insatiable thirst for such signals. (It's often said that data is becoming more valuable because it helps in the training of models. That's obviously true, but I think there's a secondary way in which it's more valuable simply as a complement to cheaper intelligence.) • A big question is whether agents will increase superstar effects (rational agents all settle on the same product) or increase dispersion (because everyone has slightly different tastes and preferences, which agents are good at eliciting, finally overcoming the artificial clustering we've been subjected to). • Many internet companies have monetized demand routing, which is in turn often predicated on short attention spans. "I'll click on the first thing I see." This has led to some amount of inefficiency, as companies try to propitiate capricious ranking algorithms and incur various placement fees. It's not all deadweight loss (willingness to pay is itself a kind of signal, which is valuable to buyers), but it's not great. How will the nature and value of this routing change in a world of personal agents? I don't know the answer, but I think that the effects might be pretty big. • Much of what I'm writing hinges on the assumption that personal agents will be on the consumer's side. I suspect that that will be the winning strategy, but whether it's true, and what it means to be true, involves a lot of other questions. Taken as a whole, the market is a massively parallelized, decentralized, and highly imperfect value attribution machine, and, taking stock of all of the effects, it seems to me that the quality point may well be the biggest: that agents will change the nature of the backpropagation such that the rewards for better products increase. Maybe this is too optimistic, but I suspect (and hope) that companies that make things that they're proud of will feel that the universe is a little more partisan in their favor.
1
300
so... an Iran-based op set up 7 fake journalist personas wit chatgpt. and they landed ~100 articles across more than a dozen publications 🤯 check your sources. always.
1
1
192
ChatGPT’s app store moment? OAI shipped Plugins and you shouldn't sleep on it. We've built one for Mizal, and it's my favorite way to use it so far. You can browse the content, ask questions and check the receipts inside the chat.
1
130
Anthropic just gave a masterclass in how to lose potential enterprise customers forever with a single email, and it’s insane! 🤯
1
2
6
559
Liquid content is here: you can turn a 3½-hour podcast into an interactive format with a single prompt. “till you’re proud of it.”
I asked Opus 5.5 to make an interactive website companion for the latest @AcquiredFM Home Depot episode. It came out pretty nice! Water color illustrations all drawn by Claude, too: claude.ai/artifact/RdE6uE7Wo… Episode here: acquired.fm/episodes/home-de…
4
322
I butchered a prompt asking my dot to recap DevDay. It fetched the info, made the 3D anims, cut the video.
3
324
so, dot has its own linux computer and it comes with a bunch of tools installed like blender and qgis. meaning i can ask it to generate this map of Montreal street lines - which would have take me a couple of hours to do manually 🤯
2
2
316
Or this rendering of the Empire State Building (I’ve never touched Blender in my life).
1
84
Google’s new Gemini 4 Argon equals GPT-6 Astra on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index at 60% of the Cost per Task with discounted prices. Google is now back to being one of the top three labs in intelligence achieved Gemini 4 Argon is @GoogleDeepMind’s first proprietary model above the Flash class in over 7 months. With high reasoning (the highest available), it scores 53 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, matching GPT-6 Astra (max, 53) and 1 point ahead of GPT-6.1 Sol (max, 52), with gains driven by lower hallucinations and stronger agentic capabilities. At its current 50% pricing discount and with cache discounts increased to 95%, Gemini 4 Argon costs $1.99 per Intelligence Index task, 60% of GPT-6 Astra (max), but 2.7x GPT-6.1 Sol (max). After the discount ends, this will rise to $3.98 (~1.2x GPT-6 Astra (max)). Gemini 4 Argon is currently being rolled out to selected users and is not publicly available. The 50% discount is an initial promotion. Google has not yet confirmed the promotion end date Key benchmarking results for Gemini 4 Argon with high reasoning: ➤ Google returns as one of the top three labs on intelligence: Gemini 4 Argon (high) scores 53 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, matching GPT-6 Astra (max, 53) and 1 point ahead of GPT-6.1 Sol (max, 52). This is 23 points above Google’s previous non-Flash model, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview (30) and 12 points ahead of Gemini 3.8 Flash (high) ➤ Launch discounts of 50% make Gemini 4 Argon competitive on Cost per Task: At current discounted pricing, Gemini 4 Argon (high) costs $1.99 per Intelligence Index task, 60% of GPT-6 Astra (max, $3.26) for a comparable level of intelligence. This cost efficiency is driven by lower token prices, rather than reduced token use, with Gemini 4 Argon averaging 62k output tokens per task, compared with 27k for GPT-6 Astra (max). Google has not yet confirmed the promotion end date, but on standard pricing, Cost per Task will increase to $3.98 ➤ Stronger agentic performance: Historically a weaker area for Gemini models, Gemini 4 Argon shows improvements across agentic evaluations. It ranks #1 on AutomationBench-AA at 77.5%, 6 points ahead of Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max, 71.3%). On Terminal Bench 4, Gemini 4 Argon achieves 57%, a +53 point improvement from Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview, only behind Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max, 64%), Claude Opus 5.5 (max, 60%) and GPT-6 Astra (59%). On AA-Briefcase, it reaches 1494 Elo. This is driven by a 65% rubric pass rate, the highest we have recorded, but lower Analytical Quality (1576 Elo) and Presentation Quality (1308 Elo) ➤ Lowest hallucination rate among leading models: On AA-Omniscience, Gemini 4 Argon has a 15% hallucination rate, the lowest of any model scoring 45+ on the Intelligence Index, compared with 51% for GPT-6 Astra (max) and 54% for GPT-6.1 Sol (max). This means Argon is much more likely to acknowledge when it does not know an answer rather than guess incorrectly. On accuracy, Gemini 4 Argon scores 50%, a 5 point decrease from Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview, and 13 points below GPT-6 Astra (max, 63%). With this slightly lower accuracy, its overall AA-Omniscience score of 42 remains in line with GPT-6 Astra (43) and GPT-6.1 Sol (42) Key model details: ➤ Context Window: 1M tokens ➤ Multimodality: Text, image, video, and speech input, with text output ➤ Pricing: $4/$20 per 1M input/output tokens at standard pricing, currently discounted 50% to $2/$10. Cached input tokens receive a 95% discount ($0.10 per 1M at discounted pricing), up from 90% on Gemini 3.8 Flash ➤ Long Decode Continuation: We tested Gemini 4 Argon with Long Decode Continuation, a new Gemini API feature that pauses long responses and resumes them across follow-up calls. This lets reasoning run up to 1M output tokens without request timeouts
164
453
230
4,900
624,245
OpenAI x Hugging Face, authorized collab this time 😄
5
284
Personal assistant, OAI version
295
I’m curious: how often do you double-check an investment claim from financial news, Reddit, YouTube, an AI assistant etc before making or reconsidering a decision? (doing some research for the startup)
14%never
14%once in while
14%often
57%always
7 votes • Final results
3
1
553
And what was most difficult when checking the claim? (finding the sources, evaluating them, reconciling conflicting information, etc...)
1
116