CTO and co-Founder @TheDataCity. Did data @OpenInnovates and @imactivate. I block anons for even the slightest rudeness.
Leeds, Yorkshire, UK
Joined March 2010
- Tweets238K
- Following1.9K
- Followers36.8K
- Likes11.3K
In order to build the consensus, in a democracy, to say Yes most of the time. Few people would argue that Manchester City Council (nor Leeds City Council) have not been overwhelmingly positive about giving permission for growth. But that doesn't mean they always give permission.
There is a strain of British YIMBYism that I think is a bit naive. It comes close to thinking that you can and should just centrally push through all growth. I much more believe that pro-growth places, like Manchester, need the power to say no sometimes. bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmd7…
That sounds really bad. Have the councillors in power at the time been voted out? Did you vote against them?
And loads of places in the USA have similar protections to the "town centre first" part of the local plan that's been applied here. I was in New Haven a month back, their Aldi is banned from central districts by local zoning law, and so it is built outside of the centre.
There's a national habitat protection issue on this site in Bath. That would be much rarer in the USA because the federal government is much less involved at the local level, but in states like California such protections would be pretty common.
As far as I understand things very similar to this Bath case happen all the time in the USA. There's a zoning system that defines land available for retail. Very similar to what happened here. Apply for retail permission outside of the zone and you risk being rejected. As here.
In a pro-growth city like Leeds the legal/officer decision would probably have been called in by councillors and taken politically and permission then given. Which is the power and outcome I want.
The decision was a legal one, following the legally required local plan and national planning law. It was very explicitly not taken by councillors.
I am very glad to live in a city which is pro-development, but I also think it should mostly be the right of places like Bath to be anti-development. If they want to try preserve their high street by blocking supermarkets,... it doesn't feel like my business in Leeds to say no.
Tom Forth retweeted
1969: Beswick: Where City's stadium is now...Those long winding empty roads with so much wasteland. My gran had a pub round there mid 70's, vaguely remember! Different world, different Manchester.
Tom Forth retweeted
Higher score than Fable 5.1 and Astra 6, wild stuff.
Kimi K3.1 Pro launches at 4th on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index scoring 55, making large gains in agentic performance; it will be the leading open-weights model once its weights are published
@Kimi_Moonshot's new reasoning model gains 11 points over Kimi K3 (max, 44). It trails only Claude Opus 5.5 (max with fallback, 58), Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max with fallback, 56), and Muse Wonder Full (max, 56) on the Intelligence Index.
Once the weights for K3.1 Pro are released it will be the highest-scoring open weights model and the gap between the leading open weights and proprietary models on the Intelligence Index will narrow from 12 points to 3.
Key results:
➤ Large gains in agentic performance: Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 3rd on GDPval-AA with 1,846 Elo, up 312 Elo from Kimi K3, behind only Claude Opus 5.5 (1,866 Elo) and Muse Wonder Full (1,857 Elo). Kimi K3.1 Pro also achieves the highest score of any model on Terminal-Bench 4.0. K3.1 Pro scores 67%, up from 13% for Kimi K3 and ahead of Claude Sonnet 5.5 (64%). AutomationBench-AA, which tests agentic SaaS workflows, rises from 58% to 73%.
➤ Gains in other evals are more moderate: Humanity's Last Exam rises from 47% to 52%, CritPt from 23% to 25%, and SciCode from 59% to 61%. AA-Omniscience Index rises from 20 to 30, as the hallucination rate falls from 53% to 44% and accuracy rises from 48% to 51%.
➤ Cost per Task roughly equal to Kimi K3 at $1.98 per Task: K3.1 Pro uses 55K output tokens per Intelligence Index task, 14% more than Kimi K3 at 48K, while its first-party token prices are 33% lower.
Additional model details:
➤ Context window: 1M tokens.
➤ Size: 2.8T total, 104B active parameters
➤ Input modalities: Text and image
➤ Weights and license: Weights currently not published, Moonshot is expected to release the weights soon after launch
➤ Pricing: $2/$10/$0.20 per 1M input/output/cache hit tokens, 33% lower than Kimi K3 on all three rates.
Congratulations to the team at @Kimi_Moonshot on the release!
Tom Forth retweeted
Kimi K3.1 Pro launches at 4th on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index scoring 55, making large gains in agentic performance; it will be the leading open-weights model once its weights are published
@Kimi_Moonshot's new reasoning model gains 11 points over Kimi K3 (max, 44). It trails only Claude Opus 5.5 (max with fallback, 58), Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max with fallback, 56), and Muse Wonder Full (max, 56) on the Intelligence Index.
Once the weights for K3.1 Pro are released it will be the highest-scoring open weights model and the gap between the leading open weights and proprietary models on the Intelligence Index will narrow from 12 points to 3.
Key results:
➤ Large gains in agentic performance: Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 3rd on GDPval-AA with 1,846 Elo, up 312 Elo from Kimi K3, behind only Claude Opus 5.5 (1,866 Elo) and Muse Wonder Full (1,857 Elo). Kimi K3.1 Pro also achieves the highest score of any model on Terminal-Bench 4.0. K3.1 Pro scores 67%, up from 13% for Kimi K3 and ahead of Claude Sonnet 5.5 (64%). AutomationBench-AA, which tests agentic SaaS workflows, rises from 58% to 73%.
➤ Gains in other evals are more moderate: Humanity's Last Exam rises from 47% to 52%, CritPt from 23% to 25%, and SciCode from 59% to 61%. AA-Omniscience Index rises from 20 to 30, as the hallucination rate falls from 53% to 44% and accuracy rises from 48% to 51%.
➤ Cost per Task roughly equal to Kimi K3 at $1.98 per Task: K3.1 Pro uses 55K output tokens per Intelligence Index task, 14% more than Kimi K3 at 48K, while its first-party token prices are 33% lower.
Additional model details:
➤ Context window: 1M tokens.
➤ Size: 2.8T total, 104B active parameters
➤ Input modalities: Text and image
➤ Weights and license: Weights currently not published, Moonshot is expected to release the weights soon after launch
➤ Pricing: $2/$10/$0.20 per 1M input/output/cache hit tokens, 33% lower than Kimi K3 on all three rates.
Congratulations to the team at @Kimi_Moonshot on the release!
What is the Chinese for bitter lesson?
Introducing Kimi K3.1 Pro: our most capable 3T-class open-weight model.
🔹 1M-token context, 2.8T total / 104B active params (MoE), Multimodal.
🔹 Full-project coding: games in Unreal, Unity & Godot.
🔹 Excels at parametric 3D modeling in Blender & CAD.
🔹 More reliable at finance work: Accurate modeling with hallucination down by 65%.
🔹 Matching the strongest proprietary models across coding, agentic and knowledge benchmarks.
Kimi K3.1 Pro and K3.1 Pro Highspeed (2–3× faster) are now live on Kimi.ai, Kimi Work, Kimi Code, and the Kimi API.
Open weights by Nov 4, 2026.
🔗 API: platform.kimi.ai
🔗 Tech blog: kimi.ai/blog/kimi-k3-1-pro
Yep. Investment moved, not lost. standard.co.uk/news/tech/mic…
The South East doesn't have much needs. It has had huge investment. I think we should raise devolved taxes to fund investment in growth. Let Leeds pay for Leeds growth.
