Je to nové? Sem s tím! // tech, auta, šachy, pořád je co se učit 🎉 // Freelo, Digital Solutions, xAI (remote), prev. VersionPress, Shoptet
Prague, Czech Republic
Joined September 2008
- Tweets31.7K
- Following1.1K
- Followers2.8K
- Likes20.1K
Super nápad: Wikipedia, ale s články jen o věcech poblíž edjefferson.com/localwiki/
mazec, oni se probudili!
Google’s Gemini 4 Carbon is the new #1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v5, and second only to Claude Opus 5.5 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index
Gemini 4 Carbon scores 59 on Intelligence Index v5, driven by leading performance in complex reasoning, knowledge, and scientific tasks. It also has large gains in coding and knowledge work, particularly when compared to other Gemini models, but it is not leading in all these areas.
As with launch of Gemini 4 Argon, Gemini 4 Carbon is being rolled out to selected users and is not yet publicly available. Google is offering a 50% launch discount, with no confirmed end date. All our charts and figures use standard pricing for both Gemini 4 Carbon and Argon.
Key results for Gemini 4 Carbon with high reasoning:
➤ Gemini 4 Carbon leads the Intelligence Index v5, with the #1 score in 4 of the 9 Index evaluations: HLE-Diamond, Terminal-Bench-Science, AA-Omniscience, AutomationBench-AA. Carbon makes substantial gains elsewhere but is not leading in coding and knowledge work
➤ Behind only Claude Opus 5.5 on coding agents: With Antigravity CLI, Gemini 4 Carbon (high) scores 59 only 3 points behind Claude Code with Claude Opus 5.5 (max, 62) on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index. Carbon ranks second on both Terminal-Bench 4.0 (64%) and FrontierCode v1.1 (51%), behind Claude Opus 5.5 (max) at 56%. Google has historically underperformed in this area and so this improvement stands out
➤ Improved agentic knowledge work, but not yet leading: On AA-Briefcase, Gemini 4 Carbon (high) scores 1609 Elo, a 126-point improvement over Gemini 4 Argon (high, 1483), but still behind models including Grok 4.7 (xhigh, 1638), Muse Wonder (max, 1659) and Kimi K3.1 Pro (1678). The largest gain comes from Presentation, up 293 Elo to 1598, alongside a 120-point improvement in Analytical Quality to 1671
➤ Lower Cost per Task than Claude Opus 5.5 for comparable overall intelligence: Gemini 4 Carbon costs $7.76 per Intelligence Index task, ~23% less than Claude Opus 5.5 (max, $10.04) but ~1.2x GPT-6 Astra (max, $6.25). It uses 123k output tokens per task, 29% fewer than Claude Opus 5.5 (max, 173k). At the same $4/$20 standard pricing, its Cost per Task is in line with Gemini 4 Argon ($7.68), while scoring 9 points higher on the Intelligence Index
➤ Leading AA-Omniscience v1.1 score, with low hallucination: Gemini 4 Carbon scores 54 on our recently updated AA-Omniscience v1.1, 6 points ahead of Claude Opus 5.5 (max, 48) and 8 points ahead of Gemini 4 Argon (46). Accuracy (% correct) rises 10 points over Argon to 58%, while its hallucination rate rises from 4% to 11%. This is still the second lowest of any model, behind only Argon, compared with 50% for both Claude Opus 5.5 (max) and GPT-6 Astra (max)
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, the same as Gemini 4 Argon’s standard pricing, with a 50% discount. Cached input tokens receive a 95% discount ($0.20 per 1M)
Congratulations to the @GoogleDeepMind team!
"No single model leads them all. Of the models we measured, Claude Opus 5.5 leads three, and five other models lead the remaining six"
v5 leaves significant room for progress across all nine evaluations, and no single model leads them all. Of the models we measured, Claude Opus 5.5 leads three, and five other models lead the remaining six:
➤ Claude Opus 5.5: FrontierCode 2.0 (46%), HLE-Diamond (68%) and AA-Omniscience v1.1 (48)
➤ GPT-6 Astra: Terminal-Bench-Science (63%) and CritPt v2 hard subset (72%)
➤ Claude Sonnet 5.5: AA-Briefcase (1812 Elo)
➤ Kimi K3.1 Pro: Terminal-Bench 4.0 (67%)
➤ Gemini 4 Argon: AutomationBench-AA (78%)
➤ Muse Wonder Full: GDP.pdf (33% all-pass)
Ještě zaujalo z vlákna:
"Open weights models fall further behind"
nitter.cf/ArtificialAnlys/status…
"Cost varies widely among the leading models. Claude Opus 5.5 (max) costs $10.04 per Intelligence Index task, GPT-6 Astra (max) $6.24 and GPT-6.1 Sol (max) $1.27. GPT-6.1 Sol (max) scores within 4 points of Claude Opus 5.5 (max) at about an eighth of the cost per task."
nitter.cf/ArtificialAnlys/status…
Open weights models fall further behind in v5. The leader, Kimi K3.1 Pro (weights not yet released), scores 46, 12 points behind the leader, compared with a 3-point gap in v4.3. Of models with released weights, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) and GLM-5.3 (max) score highest at 32, and Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) outscores all of them.
The gap is widest on HLE-Diamond and Terminal-Bench-Science, where Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 37% and 34%, compared with 68% for Claude Opus 5.5 (max) and 63% for GPT-6 Astra (max).
Borek Bernard retweeted
“who should we lay off first”
CEOs:
BREAKING: Microsoft, $MSFT, is offering buyouts to 60,000 workers as part of the company’s efforts to cut costs amid AI adoption, per Bloomberg.
Personnel on select teams in the US, Canada, India, and the UK at a vice president level and below will be eligible.
This reflects ~27% of Microsoft's total workforce.
Codex na mém mobilu přenáší data z jedné apky do druhé (API byla bída, tak si udělal nějakou malou apku a ovládá ji přes ADB, přesně nevím, co se děje 🙂), to je fajn, ale už to dělá druhý den a musím ho vždycky zdvořile poprosit, když si chci telefon na chvíli půjčit.
Historicky jsem používal Excalidraw – o tldraw jsem věděl, i pár podcastů o tom odposlouchal, ale nikdy neměl potřebu vyzkoušet.
A pak se nedávno tldraw dostalo do katalogu ChatGPT, na rozdíl od Excalidraw, a nejen že jsem přešel lusknutím prstu, ale vlastně jsem zjistil, že to umí moc pěkné věci, které by mě manuálním porovnáním ani nenapadly.
(To je ta síla ekosystému, o které jsem nedávno psal.)
Některé ukázky lepší než ChatGPT Voice, ale ne o parník a ChatGPT má na rozdíl od tohoto inteligenci, přístup k mému kontextu apod. Neboli mně Dessa zas tak magická nepřipadá (na X to lidi vynášejí do nebes).
Meet Dessa, our AI model trained from scratch on nothing but speech.
We believe speech is the natural interface for technology. So we built Dessa.
And we’re inviting AI safety researchers to explore Dessa.
Learn more: block.xyz/dessa
To, co se děje kolem TypeScriptu (různé porty do Rustu nebo třeba klidně zpátky z Go do TypeScriptu, se zlepšením výkonu o stovky procent, realizované za pár týdnů vs. miliony dolarů, co Microsoft do portu do Go dal) podle mě hezky demonstruje, čím si aktuálně procházejí všechny sw firmy: technická geniálnost se z roku na rok stala komoditou, ale jestli se má nějaká syntaktická fičura do TS dostat nebo ne, budou stále debaty na měsíce nebo i roky.
krásné načasování 🤌
Great to meet with the @saintgobain team in Paris today and learn how they’re using Microsoft Discovery to help accelerate the development of new more-efficient construction materials.
