The article suggests that if a candidate's odds of winning goes up on the gambling market, then his chance of winning in real life are improved. But they don't provide any evidence that this is actually the case. Maybe seeing the odds of one candidate rising is just as motivating to his supporters as it is to his opposition.
OAI's latest image model outperforms Google's in LMArena in both image generation and image editing. So even though some people may prefer nano banana pro in their own anecdotal tests, the average person prefers GPT image 1.5 in blind evaluations.
Add This to Gemini distribution which is being adcertised by Google in all of their products, and average Joe will pick the sneakers at the shelf near the checkout rather than healthier option in the back
Right, it only scores 3 points higher on image edit, which is within the margin of error. But on image generation, it scores a significant 29 points higher.
This outperforms Gemini 3 pro image (nano banana pro) on Text-to-Image Arena and Image Edit Arena. I'm surprised they didn't mention this leaderboard in the blog post.
I like this benchmark because its based upon user votes, so overfitting is not as easy (after all, if users prefer your result, you've won).
> Perhaps flowery language expands your ability to express yourself?
What you call "flowery" is actually "expressive". Different words, although related, convey subtle differences in meaning. That's what literature (especially poetry) is about.
I would add that our words define our world: a richer vocabulary leads to more articulated experiences.
So, writing "flowery" sentences can actually denote someone capable of conveying the rich gradient of experience into words. I consider it as a plus.
It's a pain to read your reply because it's wrong. The poster you're replying to correctly wrote the phrases and you are trying to malign his or her painstaking work by such a low effort reply without explaining exactly where he or she is wrong
Why put a time limit on exams? Why not put everyone on the same playing field by allowing unlimited time to take the exam? The majority of exams at my university have no time limit (within the operating hours of the testing center), and it works well. At the end of the day, if you don't know the material, having more time isn't going to help you.
What can be done to counter balance the weakness of markets? Mainly the incomplete information aspect. It seems like that will always be a huge problem with no solution that I can think of.
You are correct that, from a security standpoint, your software is no different than any other software I install on my computer, since desktop computers have no sandboxing. But from a privacy standpoint, it could be uniquely concerning.
With Google Drive, I choose which files to upload. It doesn't have broad access to everything on my computer.
Dropbox, iCloud, and OneDrive are just backup services, so in theory they could just back up your files as an encrypted blob and have no way to read them. Unfortunately, they don't encrypt them (which is partly why I don't use those services). But at least I have their "promise" that they won't read or analyze my files, which would make me feel better even if its a weak promise.
On the other hand, your service, by nature, is reading an analyzing all of my files using a remote server.
> We may build models that identify keywords and topics from a given document. These models may be trained on your documents and metadata, and power features within Dropbox such as improved search relevance, auto-sorting and organization features, and document summaries.
That's the thing. I'm already tied into GDrive, Dropbox, OneDrive, etc. all which have LLMs hooked up to them in some form or other. I'll gladly just wait until those catch up and I'll avoid the switching costs. You're all using the same LLMs under the hood anyway.
Is CS your passion? Stick with it. The job market isn't as good as it used to be, but it isn't as bad as people make it out to be. I am also pursuing a CS degree and I asked the same question here 6 months ago. Since then, this is what I've learned:
* Its likely that the slowing of the tech job market wasn't caused by AI, but by a change in the tax code (Section 174) and higher interest rates (companies over-hired during the pandemic when funding was abundant).
* LLMs may or may not increase developer productivity [1], and they definitely cannot replace software engineers entirely (and I don't think they ever will - but it depends who you ask)
* Anecdotally, finding a summer internship wasn't easy for me, but it also wasn't any harder than it was for my peers in other programs (engineering, finance, etc.). Job hunting is a skill that I think many people in CS don't have because it used to be easy.
* I used an agentic IDE extensively to code for my on-campus research job. I still enjoyed the job a lot, and even as an rookie developer, I still felt I played a very valuable role in my job that LLMs could not replace.
reply