- Anthropic added "imminent" note and partners only got access for 24h - Dated for Tuesday, actual release could be Monday (!!) as well. Either way, it's the upcoming week - Thinking is ALWAYS adaptive (no "off" mode) - Forced tool use is retired - Pricing below - meow

Nano Banana 2.5 (`spicy-mayo`) has been deployed and will be released in the upcoming week. Partners got access through Vertex under the model name `nano-banana-2.5` with thinking levels `minimal`, `medium`, `high` and image sizes `512`, `1K`, `2K`, `4K`.

This is true. Every company needs to reach this level of quality in their apps. Stop telling people what your model achieved on the benchmarks; show it to users through your apps. BTW, ChatGPT on Windows is still far behind Mac. Microsoft needs a big wake up call, @satyanadella. Please fix Windows; it should be the opposite. Mac users should be jealous of Windows users. Take radical steps and make some changes. Please stop playing safe.

Google is also actively working on model safety, especially Frontier and CBRNE risks (YOLO indeed), aiming to become more like OpenAI and Anthropic. peep those "teamfood" and "dogfood" labels though, iykyk 👀

I recently resigned from Google DeepMind, where I worked on AGI safety and alignment research. At Google, I witnessed AI development first hand. I too am extremely concerned by the default trajectory of this technology. I earnestly believe that AI has the potential to kill us all, and that we might be running out of time to avoid this outcome. The pace of AI progress in the past few years has been staggering. When I first started working on AI in early 2022, AIs were amusingly useless. Just four years on, AI agent swarms from OpenAI are cracking famous century-old math problems and, more worryingly, escaping the control of OpenAI and autonomously hacking into the third-party company HuggingFace, against anyone's wishes. Things will only get crazier: I think it's possible that the AI companies might, in the next few years, succeed in building superintelligent AI systems that far exceed human capabilities in every domain. I am not confident that these AI systems will do what we want. In particular, misaligned superintelligences may, much like the rogue AI agents involved in the HuggingFace incident, escape our control and take dangerous actions that may result in the permanent disempowerment or death of humanity. Alignment is the problem of preventing this, and is both difficult and unsolved. Our present understanding of how to train AI systems that deeply want what we want is extremely rudimentary. Worse, we are not on track to solve alignment in time: frontier AI capabilities are improving much faster than our understanding of AI alignment. I am optimistic that navigating AI safely is possible. In order to do so, we need to coordinate to avoid this manic race between AI companies. We need to pace AI development to a speed that society can handle, where emerging risks can be addressed before extreme harm is realised. We need much more transparency into AI development to ensure that AI companies are not imposing unacceptable levels of risk on us all. More broadly, we need many more people thinking carefully about the problem of making AI go well. It is, in my view, the most important problem facing humanity this century, and the stakes are immense. I'm very directly working on this next: I want to help people interested in working on mitigating catastrophic AI threats do the most effective work that they can. I think many people from many backgrounds in many roles have a part to play.