Ivan Juras retweeted
EAGLE-4 is here.
From EAGLE-1 to EAGLE-3, we’ve kept making inference faster.
EAGLE-4 is our fastest yet.
961.6 tokens/s on @Alibaba_Qwen’s Qwen3.8-27B with TokenSpeed (BF16, 4× @NVIDIA B300, TP4, one request, T=0).
Github: github.com/eagle-hq/EAGLE-4
Omarchy 4.5 RC1 is available as a pre-release ISO for both x86 and ARM, as well as on the RC channel. Absolutely packed with features and improvements. Please help us test it! github.com/omacom/omarchy/re…
swe-2-max is such a workhorse. I hope they keep it unlimited. It's so good. There's no way I'd be able to do as much even with 5 Claude subs (I have 3-4 all the time).
Ivan Juras retweeted
Day 16/
You can now cache for 12h in the API and for logged in users across Codex & Work we keep cache forever and you don’t have any penalty for coming back to an old conversation or resuming after a few hours and are now guaranteed to hit the cache.
Ivan Juras retweeted
Omarchy v4.0.5 release is here!
This release brings a bunch of fixes and refinements to tighten things up as we prep for the next feature release coming soon. It also bumps the packages on the stable ring, and brings an updated Omarchy kernel with BORE scheduler.
github.com/omacom/omarchy/re…
Ivan Juras retweeted
anthropic made claude code 3x faster using gzip.
a compression tool from 1992.
Ivan Juras retweeted
🚀 DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is here!
Stronger benchmark performance, faster task completion, and shorter outputs than the previous version—a Pareto improvement in performance and cost. Now live on our website, app, and API.
🛠️ Optimized for @DeepSeekHarness, Tencent CodeBuddy, WorkBuddy, and more. Upgrade to DeepSeek Harness v0.2.1-rc.1 or later for the best experience with the new model.
1/4
Ivan Juras retweeted
“Claude writes about 90% of Claude Code's code.”
the absolute legend writing the other 10%:
Claude writes about 90% of Claude Code's code.
From June to September, merged PRs more than doubled while the share reverted fell by more than 40%.
We wrote about how we changed code review to get there, and how to adopt it:
claude.dev/blog/solving-code…
Ivan Juras retweeted
Our biggest customer nearly destroyed my startup today
He wanted to upgrade to a €2,000 per month plan
Normally this would be amazing news
But we receive a €180,000 EU innovation grant for companies with less than €100,000 in annual revenue
His upgrade would put us over the limit
I called him immediately
“Do not send any money” I shouted
The client was very confused, so I did the only thing a great CEO would do
I personally introduced him to our biggest competitor
They signed a lifetime contract that same afternoon
In Europe, the best way to grow is to decrease revenue
Ivan Juras retweeted
AI was supposed to make us work less
I've never been this tired in my life
most days I have up to 10 agents running at the same time. one fixing a bug, one writing pages, one refactoring something I already forgot I asked for, 3 other I have no idea what they are doing but i suppose i ask it?
and I jump from conversation to conversation all day
compared to 5 years ago, I probably context switch 100x more
by the end of the day my brain is fried. completely toasted. nothing left, not even for the people I love
I call it the fried brain effect
thought it was just me but almost every founder I talk to lately says the exact same thing
we got superpowers, and somehow the pressure only went up. if you can ship 10x more, you feel like you have to ship 10x more. every single day
I don't have a solution
honestly I have no idea where this goes from here
anyone else feeling this?
Ivan Juras retweeted
Dusting off this tweet from April because this gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is *widening*. It's now less "two groups of people speaking past each other" and more a sharp funnel.
- Napkin math somewhere around 6B people (~75% of the population) have barely come in contact with LLMs at all.
- Around 1-2B (~20%) are casual and infrequent users of free-tier ChatGPT-like products. This group sees derpy chatbots and treats them a bit like a better Google search, a writing aid, or etc. Maybe an agent tries to book you a flight. I have non-tech friends who (reasonably, imo) say they have not much use for it at all. Even many professionals outside of math&code are in this tier. For example, execs and many other functions spend a lot of their time talking to other people, so while they understand what is happening intellectually, it is still second-hand and a bit abstract.
- Now we get to professional use of frontier-grade LLMs in math&code. Somewhere around 20M people (0.2%) see first-hand that large, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt. Building apps, copying apps, translating apps, decompiling apps from binaries... This has all happened very quickly and recently - less than 1 year ago, I was writing code manually by hand, typing memorized computer code commands into a code editor character by character, occasionally pressing Tab to autocomplete a little chunk of code.
- And finally we get to the ~5,000 people (~0.00006%) with access to frontier-grade systems internally. The external world has seen the preview. It looks like swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects: minting zero days, running cyber attacks and defenses at machine speeds, discovering new science, advancing the frontier of mathematics. Things that would have taken top professionals in the industry years of work. Meanwhile, human review and comprehension are starting to fall behind. For example, people are still involved in the "archeology" of the OpenAI-HF incident from many months ago. Mathematicians may be poring over the 722 manuscripts on frontier mathematics for a while.
The funnel is driven by a combination of factors:
1. The impact scales with ambition, problem size, and horizon. A question with a paragraph answer barely stresses the system. You need a reservoir of big, difficult problems that you really care about. This aspect drives the consumer / professional dimension of the funnel.
2. The jaggedness of the system (which I have written about a lot separately). Capability peaks in domains that are digital, verifiable and economically valuable. This is because LLM capability emerges from reinforcement learning on verifiable rewards on a curated environment mixture driven by revenue potential. This aspect primarily drives the area (e.g. math&code) dimension of the funnel.
3. Access. Free-tier, paid-tier, internal.
So this is the weirdness of the moment. The general public has mostly not interacted with these systems. When they have, it looks like a derpy chatbot. The majority of professionals still see only a modest uplift. And a small sliver of professionals are experiencing the vertigo of the curve going vertical. And it is all happening at the same time.
Judging by my tl there is a growing gap in understanding of AI capability.
The first issue I think is around recency and tier of use. I think a lot of people tried the free tier of ChatGPT somewhere last year and allowed it to inform their views on AI a little too much. This is a group of reactions laughing at various quirks of the models, hallucinations, etc. Yes I also saw the viral videos of OpenAI's Advanced Voice mode fumbling simple queries like "should I drive or walk to the carwash". The thing is that these free and old/deprecated models don't reflect the capability in the latest round of state of the art agentic models of this year, especially OpenAI Codex and Claude Code.
But that brings me to the second issue. Even if people paid $200/month to use the state of the art models, a lot of the capabilities are relatively "peaky" in highly technical areas. Typical queries around search, writing, advice, etc. are *not* the domain that has made the most noticeable and dramatic strides in capability. Partly, this is due to the technical details of reinforcement learning and its use of verifiable rewards. But partly, it's also because these use cases are not sufficiently prioritized by the companies in their hillclimbing because they don't lead to as much $$$ value. The goldmines are elsewhere, and the focus comes along.
So that brings me to the second group of people, who *both* 1) pay for and use the state of the art frontier agentic models (OpenAI Codex / Claude Code) and 2) do so professionally in technical domains like programming, math and research. This group of people is subject to the highest amount of "AI Psychosis" because the recent improvements in these domains as of this year have been nothing short of staggering. When you hand a computer terminal to one of these models, you can now watch them melt programming problems that you'd normally expect to take days/weeks of work. It's this second group of people that assigns a much greater gravity to the capabilities, their slope, and various cyber-related repercussions.
TLDR the people in these two groups are speaking past each other. It really is simultaneously the case that OpenAI's free and I think slightly orphaned (?) "Advanced Voice Mode" will fumble the dumbest questions in your Instagram's reels and *at the same time*, OpenAI's highest-tier and paid Codex model will go off for 1 hour to coherently restructure an entire code base, or find and exploit vulnerabilities in computer systems. This part really works and has made dramatic strides because 2 properties: 1) these domains offer explicit reward functions that are verifiable meaning they are easily amenable to reinforcement learning training (e.g. unit tests passed yes or no, in contrast to writing, which is much harder to explicitly judge), but also 2) they are a lot more valuable in b2b settings, meaning that the biggest fraction of the team is focused on improving them. So here we are.
























