I tested this with ChatGPT-5.1 and Gemini 3.0. Both correctly (according to Wikipedia at least) stated that George Olshevsky assigned it to its own genus in 1991.
This is because there are many words about how to do web searches.
Gemini 3.0 might do well even without web searches. The lesson from gpt 4.5 and Gemini 3 seems to be that scaling model size (even if you use sparse MoE) allows you to capture more long-tail knowledge. Some of Humanity's Last Exam also seems to be explicitly designed to test this long-tail obscure knowledge extraction, and models have been steadily chipping away at it.
It’s a lovely set of aspirations for how a model should behave. But unclear to me is the extent to which expressing those aspirations actually compels the model to follow them.
I used to be a full-time developer back in the day. Then I was a manager. Then I was a CTO. I stopped doing the day-to-day development and even stopped micro-managing the detailed design.
When I tried to code again, I found I didn't really have the patience for it -- having to learn new frameworks, APIs, languages, tricky little details, I used to find it engrossing: it had become annoying.
But with tools like Claude Code and my knowledge about how software should be designed and how things should work, I am able to develop big systems again.
I'm not 20% more productive than I was. I'm not 10x more productive than I was either. I'm infinity times more productive because I wouldn't be doing it at all otherwise, realistically: I'd either hire someone to do it, or not do it, if it wasn't important enough to go through the trouble to hire someone.
Sure, if you are a great developer and spend all day coding and love it, these tools may just be a hindrance. But if you otherwise wouldn't do it at all they are the opposite of that.
my grand theory on AI coding tools is that they don't really save on time, but they massively save on annoyance. I can save my frustration budget for useful things instead of fiddling with syntax or compiler messages or repetitive tasks, and oftentimes this means I'll take on a task I would find too frustrating in an already frustrating world, or stay at my desk longer before needing to take a walk or ditch the office for the bar.
If you’re a CTO who can no longer program, the solution isn’t to use AI to program again; the solution is to hire people who can program. The question at hand is whether AI helps your developers, not whether it helps you. You’re the CTO. It’s not your job to program.
Some of the projects I've been doing are for myself in other businesses, automating processes that were time consuming or... annoying.
Others are for start-ups that are pre-money, pre-revenue where I can build things myself without having to deal with hiring people.
In a larger organization, certainly I'd delegate to other people, but if it's just for me or new unfunded start-ups, this is working out very well.
And it's not that I "can no longer program". I could program, it's just that I don't find the nuts and bolts of it as interesting as I used to and am more focused on functionality, algorithm, and UI.
We need to be doing much, much more of this so that the country has ownership of substantial percentages of the critical infrastructure, including AI. That seems to be one of the only ways that the citizens in general will be able to share in the fruits of the technology, similarly to how Alaskan citizens get payments from petroleum.
Part of the reason we don't want this is because it creates an enormous government spoil, which is the decision to label a given company as part of the critical infrastructure of the country. For example: why Intel and not AMD? Does Micron make the cut? Seagate? What about the companies that make the inputs to the fabs? Telecom companies that run the Internet? Microsoft & Apple because business runs on their software?
This is Too Big To Fail on steroids.
> citizens in general will be able to share in the fruits of the technology, similarly to how Alaskan citizens get payments from petroleum
The alternative approach is right there in your answer. Like in Alaska or Norway, tax the winners and apply the benefits to citizens.
Sadly, we are going the other way both on taxation and benefits. The good news is we can at any time choose to live differently. Some might debate whether we could maintain our competitive business environment if Intel or Nvidia paid a tax rate comparable to yours, but perhaps it's worth a try?
I agree with your point, but to answer your first question, “why Intel and not AMD?” It is simply because Intel is the only US company, and one of only three chip manufacturers worldwide to even try to make cutting edge chips and that has an outside shot of doing so in the next decade or so.
Domestic chip production is a national security interest. Frankly the US should be funding one or more companies to expand their fab capabilities.
AMD doesn't fab their own chips. They currently utilize TSMC for that. Yes, if we were only talking about cutting edge chip design the US has no shortage.
USG is looking at spending ~$10B on an Intel stake. It's worth wondering whether it might make more sense to instead put the same money into AMD and earmark it for US fabs. Ditto NVidia.
There is an argument to be made there about how best to allocate the funds, but regardless of how the funds are deployed that spend has to be on Intel if you want it to protect US chip manufacturing and R&D. There are no other US chip manufacturers that are even trying to produce a chip under 12 nm. Unfortunately they are the only viable option.
Claude Sonnet 4.0 didn't say "nope" to the same prompt but also didn't agree. It replied:
Actually, 24V control signals in HVAC are typically AC, not DC. Most residential and commercial HVAC systems use 24VAC for their control circuits.
This 24VAC comes from a step-down transformer that reduces the standard line voltage (120V or 240V AC) down to 24VAC. The reasons for using AC include:
* Safety - Lower voltage reduces shock hazard
* Simplicity - Direct transformation from line voltage without need for rectification
* Cost - AC transformers are inexpensive and reliable
* Compatibility - Most traditional HVAC components (thermostats, contactors, relays, gas valves) are designed for 24VAC
However, you will find 24VDC in some applications:
* Modern digital/smart thermostats and controls
* Building automation systems (BAS)
* Some newer high-efficiency equipment
* Systems that need to interface with low-voltage DC electronics
But if you're working with a typical residential or light commercial HVAC system, assume 24VAC unless specifically noted otherwise. Always verify with a multimeter set to AC voltage when troubleshooting!
Feedback on the text: I find the way that the text generates randomly across the line very distracting because I (and I think most people) read from left to right. Having letters appear randomly is much more difficult to follow.
Are there options to have the text appear differently?
If it's really better than Claude Code while using Sonnet 4.0, then I'd pay a monthly fee for it, but only if I can use my Claude subscription the same way Claude Code does.
I do not want to pay API charges or be limited to a fixed number of "credits" per month.
You can get another $20/mo account and switch between them with /login. It won't give you continuous coding probably, but at least you can go for twice as long with a shorter wait afterwards.
I find that each account gives me 1-2 hours of coding in Claude Code usually.
reply