If they leave Steve Bannon with no time to develop thoughts, I'll tip one out for them.

> Model 2, which is somewhat more capable than Mythos 5. Our rough qualitative sense is that this model is a noticeable improvement on Mythos 5 for many tasks relevant to internal use but does not display a capability jump of the degree observed from Claude Opus 4.6 to Mythos Preview. We do not currently have plans to release this model externally, and have not run all of our typical suite of predeployment assessments, so we have somewhat lower confidence in our beliefs about its capabilities.

Meanwhile I can't really tell the difference between Fable and Opus for my tasks. I kinda think Fable does a better UX work so I keep using it for that because I couldn't be bothered to A/B them, but otherwise it's all the same and the model and effort are just feel good knobs I twist to still remain a load-bearing element. At least that's my honest take.

>thinks

They can’t measure even measure it, it’s just vibes. They may not even be more productive.

Well, it is a data point but AI R&D at a frontier lab is not really a representative stand-in for a regular workplace.

AI R&D efforts != productivity. I think it's fairly obvious that SOTA research is less affected by AI than writing another boilerplate react frontend.

So they did two years of work in one year? yeah right lol

> So Anthropic thinks their productivity is not even doubled by AI.

I find it hard to imagine launching this criticism at a new technology.