I would suggest you to hook fable or 5.6 to check it regularly and its work because it gets lost easily on stuff it was not trained on. I'm doing some custom inference engine optimization and it's a workhorse but it can easily lose its way and if you don't recheck it you will get wrong answers in the end.

Kind of feels like this applies to every single model, from Astra to Qwen, they all eventually lose track of the plot unless you feed it some human's input that can steer them right every now and then. The only difference is how often you need to do so, and also how often you want to do so heavily influences how good quality the results will be.

you are not false, but there is still difference. its just that the better models are correct more of the time and will better validate its own steps. glm sometimes will understand the plan start implementing and then forget part of it and then say it finished. or then take a wrong turn somewhere and not correct. but they will all happily proclaim they are correct till you question it.

Yeah that's what I already do. Fable writes the plan and checks things at certain milestones. Otherwise it does get lost indeed.

I also have a legacy pro plan and the only limitation is if you are trying to work in the morning from Europe because you are in the 3x usage overlapping China time but after 12 or so you basically can run it at least for me at least 3 parallel sessions all the time.

Sure, but they are replacing same generation model to another not just switching opus to gpt.

But it’s more like them swapping Opus 5 for Sonnet 5.5 or something. IMO OP’s right to argue against it.

it was not the first model served for free, i remember grok and others beeing free on openrouter but they never had this popularity because they where not good enough.

idk i think that i spend significant tokens with both to be able to tell 5.3 is way better overall.

https://kommodo.ai/i/IFSUUQYT522uZXWvePZ1

it still fells stupid sometimes and it is benchmaxxed for sure. but its good enough that im building all the hobby projects with it.

To be fair, there is no 3 turns that I don't have to jump in into what Opus 5 is doing. There is either some regression or my prompting skills are so much worse now. Flash is not perfect and honestly some things depend on how big context do you keep. So I'm keeping like a really short context with my flash, but it works okay, even though it has a tendency to overthink, and yeah, I run it always in max effort mode.

Use Opus 4.8. 5 is absolute garbage.

Don't use DS4 Flash in max effort mode. It's just spinning its wheels, in my experience (I have a harness for testing models with 25 real bugs/features/etc from my real projects that I measure outcomes against) DS4 flash does _worse_ with max effort. It will literally have the right approach and reason itself away from it.

I don’t know how 5 can do so much better in benchmarks but absolutely suck to use in practice compared to 4.X. Fable feels better, Kimi and GLM also feel better sometimes but tbh all of them make plenty of annoying mistakes.

The prompts in most of the benchmarks match what you have to write to obtain good performance from Opus 5. Reading benchmarks is very revealing.

i have heard that for max effort in flash and it can be true, but overall it still performs better then the high, i run a mixed q2q4 quant.

I will give it a try, but from the benchmarks it never exceeds the DS4 flash benchmarks by significant margin and And I feel that the throughput that you will get on those machines or what I'm getting with my local hosted flash will be so much worse that it's not worth it.

i run flash v4 at 2bit, its pretty great and on my tests against full model It didn't lose any capabilities. It just was thinking more. So you don't have the same efficiency.

You don't care what were you trying to build but for a quick me alone Linux app I used Flutter. Honestly it's my go-to when I want to have a quick native app on any platform but dont want to bundle electron.

Flutter is solid choice, and Canonical seems to be putting weight behind it for Ubuntu as well. Canonical is also now the new lead maintainer of Flutter Desktop.

It's not that they don't care, it's just that the protocol behind it was never designed for it.

Compared for example to email where when you want to send email to somebody, you discover its MX settings on the DNS level and then send it directly and the receiver can verify are you allowed to send those emails. With phone calls it's basically a network of interconnects so I'm sending the call directly to my provider but that provider to reach the destination has multiple steps and they have to trust each other with the numbers signalling. Compare it to a regular snail mail where everybody can write anything as a sender.

What most of the providers are switching to now is for enduser the case is if the phone number that you want to signal is not registered with us, you are not allowed to signal it. Which is fine and covers most of the cases but imagine that you are a business and have multiple providers And you have boughta number block with one provider and another one is offering you better minute price for outgoing calls. Or you want to have a forwarding to your cell phone number. Or you want to signal your number when you're calling prospects from CRM. The regulation usuall differs from country to country, but most allow you to signal any number that you own with any provider that you use. And this is correct, but the problem is verification.

Whatever the issue is, they should figure out a system that can't be abused by scammers. Failing that, I'm totally fine with also blocking companies that have their own reasons to spoof numbers.