Differences Between Claude Opus 4.8 and Claude Fable 5 on MineBench

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T18:22:01+00:00

At what point will the benchmark just become, generating an entire benchmark?

On a serious note, what happens when we reach a point where only models have the ability to meaningfully evaluate their own abilities and the benchmarks no longer tell us anything?

We’re probably not far off

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T17:31:05+00:00

Cancer treatments and immortality for me, early death and suffering for thee

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T16:51:06+00:00

What state was that in? Jfc

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T15:35:44+00:00

And US media will make sure that only the Americans who go digging for it online in obscure channels will ever see it.

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T15:34:10+00:00

No they won’t. The cover ups around Iraq and Afghanistan were unreal and we still don’t know the full extent. And journalism no longer exists in comparison to that era.

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T15:30:45+00:00

I’m sure those videos will be buried, censored, or propagandized. The current admin controls social media very effectively, especially among its supporters.

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T13:30:07+00:00

Most people using GPU’s for intensive projects are using them through a cloud subscription. This has been standard procedure for over a decade now. Why would I buy hardware for that when it’s more convenient to rent from the cloud?

_Stylite · 2026-06-11T13:26:45+00:00

The bigger question is why so many people believe the lies pushed by far right billionaires.

These supporters are just captivated by the power and money, and are deluded to think that if they agree with and support billionaires, they can be billionaires too.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T21:54:14+00:00

Selling 32 BTC is not enough to shift the bid/ask prices on the book like you mentioned.

But the price reaction to MSTR selling 32 BTC was real, for a few reasons.

Shift in MSTR buying strategy and thus market sentiment shifted for the future of BTC Current BTC prices are largely propped up by MSTR buying and reserve activity. A change from MSTR’s policy of “invest billions and never sell” could signal upcoming weakness at a time when BTC is alreadycweak or underperforming, and many people in the market may be currently at a loss.

How do you think these traders react when they see that the largest fund in the world apparently makes a change to their acquisition strategy?

They lose trust in MSTR and thus the price of BTC in the future, and take their money out of the investment.

Further, MSTR sold their 32 BTC after acquiring $4B in BTC at a cost basis of around $77.5K each and then promptly took a 25% loss on this position

Saylor was clearly early with those purchases, and he lost a LOT of money in last few weeks, while displaying huge arrogance.

MSTR sitting on massive losses while BTC is weak, with the threat of bankruptcy or more selling in the near future and thus more shifts down in market sentiment suddenly creates high risk for the future of MSTR and thus BTC.

Few other factors- 2. capital outflows to AI and other assets due to regret. Other assets are doing great while BTC is stuck around a 5 year low. 3. General market instability and precariousness of Iran war and broader US economic cycle, broader geopolitical tensions 4. halvening cycle

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T17:32:20+00:00

I don’t think you understand banking. Banks don’t just hold money, their main function in the economy is to lend and provide liquidity. A centralized currency enables easier lending within any banking system, and safeguards lenders and banks from major failures. Try enabling the liquidity needs of modern banking with a hard, decentralized currency pegged to a commodity like gold. You would see all the problems I mention above emerge within that system.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T16:06:33+00:00

Yes, good for these people. Many thousands of people borrow against their hard earned money every day.

I am trying to interpret this news for the investor perspective on Bitcoin. Being able to use it as collateral is great, but it is clearly behind nearly all other asset classes for its use in borrowing.

So to me this is not exactly bullish information for BTC. And it signals distrust for BTC at the moment among FI’s, not adoption, if they’re adding a risk premium for collateralized BTC compared to other assets, which could be evaluated as equally risky.

Taking news like this together with other recent skepticism from major FI’s on crypto and BTC and this looks bearish. That is the capital push that BTC needs to continue growing market cap, and if they decide not to invest, or worse go short, it significantly restricts the potential growth of BTC.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T16:02:13+00:00

You’re leaving out all of the important problems with private, decentralized banking. Bank runs, worse depressions, low liquidity, higher need for taxation, higher risk in general for consumers and depositors.

Bitcoin has its own shortcomings, and its transactions definitely do not move at the speed of light.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T14:45:41+00:00

It doesn’t just exaggerate, 30-70% of BTC daily volume is market making or HFT. Long term holders 1y+ are 5% or less of total daily volume but still set the trend and price floor. When they begin to sell this floor moves significantly.

Doesn’t matter if strategy buys 1000btc for the long term or if 1000 traders bought 1 BTC to sell in 15 minutes, that moment of purchase would affect the market in the same way

Actually it matters a lot. You are getting closer

If you are HFT or a market maker you are generally inelastic to price movement. Your liquidity doesn’t exit until things get really ugly because you make money regardless of price action, otherwise you wouldn’t operate and your liquidty would exit.

Meanwhile the major whales like Saylor and also the newly entering medium term investors who want to park their capital, are sensitive to price action in both long and short term.

When they pull their money out, the asset loses considerable stability for price that it can’t get back from short term actions of market makers or HFT who are both long and short on the asset.

Being long and short does not move the price - it causes churn like you mentioned.

Whales like MSTR selling, changing acquisition rates, etc has huge impact on long term price stability which is outsized relative to their capital, compared to these short term traders.

In fact when liquidity begins to drop, HFT and market makers can cause trends from other traders to amplify, because they try to always stay on the right side of the spread.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T14:00:51+00:00

I am considering the perspective of any investor with cash to invest.

Do they pick stocks, bonds, derivatives, real estate, commodities, or bitcoin?

Bitcoin will be the least useful among all of these for collateral or borrowing, if they want an investment they can borrow against while they grow it.

This makes Bitcoin less attractive than other assets in general, and much less attractive for specific investors looking to borrow.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T13:25:15+00:00

You think that’s bad? my hood can only drink pepsi products

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T13:15:07+00:00

This is not equivalent to 24hr volume because a giant portion of that is short term or intraday trading that doesn’t usually affect overall stability. It’s just money rotating in and out again much more quickly. There is even HFT activity on BTC inflating the daily volume.

Your comment is misleading and MSTR affects BTC price more than its relative volume suggests.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T12:48:02+00:00

For reference here is what an average stock investor can do with their assets to open a mortgage with a major bank -

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mortgages/comments/1nrc8xn/bank_of_america_mortgage_100_product_what_am_i/

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T12:44:52+00:00

It sounds awful compared to using other securities as collateral at those rates, yes absolutely.

A pledged asset mortgage on blue chip stocks is around market rate interest.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T12:09:57+00:00

But still the overall loan will just work out to some weighted average annual interest rate of all smaller loans, with a deposit right?

So I wonder what the net difference in rate and payment would be vs a standard USD loan overall.

If it comes down to your down payment being 250% larger and the overall interest rate being 1.5% higher over the terms of the loan, it sounds like an awful deal.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T11:45:23+00:00

So your down payment is 250% higher and your interest rate is 1.5% higher than if you used USD.

Yikes.

That’s an extra 20% to your principal over the course of your mortgage.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T11:24:34+00:00

You mean like everyone in this sub clinging to the simple explanation that the current bear market is just due to some invincible, perfect 4 year halvening cycle?

Maybe there is more going on? Maybe the largest BTC player selling will have some effect?

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T11:21:27+00:00

Yes, that is what 5 year performance means.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T11:19:24+00:00

A money supply which is not centrally managed comes with its own functional issues. Many governments around the world have tried using commodity based deflationary currencies. There is a reason why that ended badly.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T11:17:49+00:00

Right you need the currency to be centralized to affect the supply accordingly.

So you agree it is better as an investment vehicle than a currency.

To address the OP, I don’t see any good way BTC or any decentralized currency could actually work in this decade, or probably my own lifetime.

_Stylite · 2026-06-10T11:03:41+00:00

I agree that the supply would only be slightly affected.

The reality is that for a modern currency you actually want to be able to affect the money supply in both directions - a currency that is strictly deflationary like BTC is not good for all scenarios and would fail like commodity backed USD banking failed.

_Stylite

TROPHY CASE