Introducing Benchmark Reviews: our new initiative to audit AI benchmarks. We are launching with 15 benchmarks: 4 Verified, 9 Flawed, and 2 with not enough information for a review.

I've seen people describe Jev as an "AI if statement". But what if it actually WAS an if statement? Introducing Probably: a programming language powered by Jev: Jev baked into the language. “feels” asks a question. “match” routes between descriptions. “while” keeps going until something stops feeling true. This is obviously a toy, but it's fun to think about what something like Jev unlocks. Jev makes the decisions, an LLM does the writing, and a little program ties it together.

i was trying to think of a job where you had to pay attention to a lot of things so this one is looking at incoming tickets, a menu which has a recipe, pushes ingredients from prep station, stove, etc based on the dish, across a large number of work stations. dishes can burn, food can get cold, so you have to manage and track a lot of many different decisions

Introducing our first agent tool: the Brand API This helps gen AI agents solve 3 problems: - Extract: produce on-brand assets when users already have a brand - Search: find and retrieve brands for inspiration, from our curated index - Verify: check their own work against, see what's off brand and how to fix it Anyone can try it for free today at Check out the full blog, and case study with @intelligenceco @ndrewpignanelli below.

After co-inventing ChatGPT, I kept asking myself: why have superhuman chat models not led to AGI? I’ve spent the last 2 years in stealth building a new way to train models (RLCD), and a new type of frontier AI model that we are releasing today: Jev • 20-200x faster • 40-400x cheaper (w/ output tokens free) • Frontier composable intelligence optimized for decisions AFAICT the shortest path to AI-based economic revolution

OK, let me irritate everyone for a moment ... The non cynical view here is that the labs are trying to navigate impending, unsophisticated federal regulation and a "high strung", well financed doomer complex. And it's just a tough, tough spot to be in. It's entirely consistent to applaud their attempts to find a governance approach to questions around safety and security. To express skepticism about the proposal. And also express concerns about the larger safetyist complex. It's just important not to conflate the three. I'll put aside rhetoric on near term species extinction. Like any major epoch of our industry, new technologies have security implications. And I do think we're in a much better spot with open dialog between Anthropic, OpenAI and SpaceX on how best to handle, whether it's pacing or not, an independent oversight body or not. (I'm in the "not" camp ... ) I joke in exasperation about heavy handed federal regulation which would clearly be disastrous for all of us. Unfortunately I do think it's a likely outcome if we don't collectively get our shit together. I have no special knowledge. But from what I've gathered over the last few days, the labs really are trying to do the right thing here. It's a very complex and shifting landscape. And the broader safety complex still sucks and continues to be a national security risk.