Ever written careful instructions for an A.I. agent, only to watch it ignore them an hour into a session? The fix lies in knowing WHERE your instructions should live. Read on for all the details...
WHY AGENTS "FORGET"
• Everything an agent knows lives in its context window, and every token costs money and (more subtly) attention.
• Long sessions trigger "compaction": The conversation gets summarized to free up room, and instructions given early can get squeezed out.
• Every steering method answers one question: How do I make an instruction cheap to carry and hard for the agent to lose?
THE STEERING TOOLKIT (drawn from Anthropic's Claude Code, but the ideas generalize)
1.) Always-on files (e.g., CLAUDE.md): Loaded every session and re-read after compaction. Keep them under 200 lines, give them an owner, review changes like code.
2.) Rules: Path-scoped constraints that load only when relevant files are touched.
3.) Skills: Procedures (deploy workflows, checklists) whose full text loads only when invoked.
4.) Subagents: side tasks that run in isolated context windows... only the final summary returns.
5.) Hooks: deterministic code that fires on lifecycle events. The big idea: An instruction is a probability while a hook is a guarantee. If something must *never* happen, enforce it with code, not prose.
THE INDUSTRY IS CONVERGING
• AGENTS.md (kicked off by OpenAI, stewarded by the The Linux Foundation and backed by Google, Microsoft and AWS) serves similar function to CLAUDE.md and is read natively by Codex, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Gemini CLI and dozens more tools across 60,000+ repositories.
• ETH Zurich researchers studied 138 real-world repos: Developer-written instruction files improved agent task success ~4% and cut agent-introduced bugs by 35-55%.
• The same study found LLM-generated instruction files DECREASED success while raising inference costs by 20%+. These data suggest the value is the human judgment encoded in the file... **you can't delegate the steering wheel to the thing being steered**.
NOT A CODER? THE SAME FRAMEWORK APPLIES
• Custom instructions = your always-on file (keep it short).
• Projects and Gems = your path-scoped rules.
• Custom GPTs = the consumer cousin of skills.
BOTTOM LINE
• Match persistence to relevance: always-on files stay ruthlessly short; procedures and area-specific conventions load on demand.
• "Always" and "never" are signals you need a guardrail (deterministic enforcement), not an instruction.
• Treat steering files as code: owned, reviewed and pruned. An instructions file that grows without gardening dilutes the instructions that matter.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Filtering by Tag: #superdatascience
How dbt Won Analytics Engineering, with dbt Lab’s CEO Tristan Handy
dbt is THE open-source tool that brought software-engineering rigor to data transformation; it's now used by over 100,000 teams. Today's rockstar guest, Tristan Handy, is CEO of dbt Labs, the company behind the movement.
More on Tristan:
• President and co-founder of "Fivetran + dbt Labs" (recent merger).
• Coined the term "analytics engineering".
• Over two decades of experience as a data practitioner working in both large enterprises and startups.
• His expertise and data industry best practices have influenced thousands of subscribers and listeners weekly via his newsletter (The Analytics Engineering Roundup) and The Analytics Engineering Podcast.
In this episode, Tristan explains:
• What dbt is.
• Why dbt Labs' the recent merger with Fivetran is a win for dbt users.
• Why skill files are so powerful.
• Why he turned down acquisition offers for years
• How the semantic layer keeps A.I. agents from confidently getting your metrics wrong
• ...and much more.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
How to Choose Model Size and Effort Level: The Two Critical Dials
Every major A.I. platform now offers two dials that shape what you get back: how large of a model you pick and how much effort it can invest. Here's what each dial does and how to use them together:
THE "MODEL SIZE" DIAL
• Model selection swaps which set of frozen weights handles your request. Weights are fixed at training time; nothing in your prompt changes them.
• Larger models encode more knowledge and capability, and each output token costs more.
• Your prompt steers predictions but doesn't teach: Paste in docs for a library the model has never seen and it will use them for that request, then retain nothing.
THE "EFFORT" DIAL
• Effort shapes all output tokens: reasoning, tool calls and messages to you.
• At high effort, a model reads more files, verifies more of its own work and pushes further before checking in. In one Anthropic comparison, the high-effort path generated ~7x more tokens to reach a higher-confidence answer.
• Effort sets how far a model is willing to travel, not how far it *must* (thus a well-trained model stops when it finds the bug rather than padding the bill).
WHICH DIAL SHOULD YOU TURN?
• First off, when output disappoints, try fixing your prompt and context. A vague request is the most common culprit for a disappointing output and *no* knob will fix that.
• Skipped files, unrun tests, an abandoned refactor? Those are examples of DILIGENCE FAILURE: in these cases, RAISE THE EFFORT.
• Full context, visible attempt, still confidently wrong? Those are examples of CAPABILITY FAILURE: in these cases, upgrade to a BIGGER MODEL.
COST
• Cheaper *per token* isn't always cheaper *per task*. On hard multi-step work, a large model reaches the quality bar in fewer steps, so total cost can come out lower than a small model grinding at the ceiling of its ability (see chart).
• On routine work, the equation flips: Both models get it right, so the big model's extra verification is wasted money. Drop down to a smaller model.
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
• Start with defaults; providers tune them to what most users want to spend. Treat effort as a preference for your kind of work, generally NOT as a task-by-task fiddle.
• Route routine work to smaller, cheaper models and reserve the frontier for problems that stretch it.
• This applies everywhere: Anthropic, OpenAI, Google and open-source reasoning-model providers have all converged on separate capability and effort controls.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Anyone Can Write Code Now, So What Gets You Hired? (With Priyanka Vergadia)
Pretty much every company has bought A.I. tools. Few of them are seeing a return. My guest today, Priyanka Vergadia (bestselling author with 250k followers; ex-Google; ex-Microsoft) has the fixes!
More on Priyanka:
• Better known to her 250k-strong developer community as "The Cloud Girl".
• Wrote the number-one bestselling book "Visualizing Google Cloud" and more recently co-authored "Visualizing GenAI".
• Led developer relations for North America at Google.
• Drove enterprise go-to-market for GitHub Copilot at Microsoft
• Has now gone all-in on her own firm advising A.I. adoption.
In this episode, Priyanka explains:
• Why A.I. raised the technical floor and made "taste" the new ceiling.
• How to structure Claude skills so your A.I. output stops being slop.
• Her 10-20-70 rule for A.I. budgets.
• ...plus she shares some breaking news you'll hear in this episode first :)
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Alibaba’s Qwen3.8-Max: Open-Weight Model Surpasses Most American Frontier Labs
Chinese tech giant Alibaba is shipping Qwen3.8-Max: It'll be the largest open-weight A.I. model ever released and (as shown in chart) it's competing at the frontier alongside closed-source models from Anthropic and OpenAI. Here's what you need to know:
THE MODEL
• 2.4 trillion parameters in a mixture-of-experts architecture; only ~95B are active per token, so the headline number reflects capacity, not per-request compute.
• Accepts text, images and video, with a one-million-token context window (~750K words).
• Selectable low, medium or extra-high reasoning effort, so no paying for lengthy thinking traces when you need a quick lookup.
• All part of Alibaba's ~$53B, three-year bet on cloud and A.I. infrastructure.
THE BENCHMARKS
• Alibaba frames it as second only to Anthropic's Claude Fable 5; independent signals so far land in a similar neighborhood.
• Immediately became the highest-ranking Chinese model for text on the Arena leaderboard and ranked second globally on vision.
• Scored 86.6 on Terminal-Bench (agentic command-line tasks), ahead of both Claude Opus 4.8 and Fable 5.
• Vendor demos showcase multi-day autonomy: 10+ days coding unattended, plus reproducing an ML research paper from scratch and then beating 87% of 526 human teams in a live contest.
THE PRICE WAR
• $2 per million input tokens, $6 output and 25¢ cached input.
• Undercuts domestic rival Kimi K3 by more than half on output.
• Combined rate is less than a third of Claude Opus and under a quarter of GPT-5.6 Sol's... and cached-input pricing lets agentic workloads collapse toward the 25¢ floor.
IS IT SAFE TO USE A CHINESE MODEL?
• The risk depends less on the model and more on how your data reach it.
• Consumer apps and the hosted API route data through infrastructure governed by Chinese law, so keep anything sensitive or proprietary out of that.
• Safer: open weights hosted by a Western A.I. cloud (like Lightning AI) in your own jurisdiction.
• Safest: run the model on your own hardware: weights are inert files that can't phone home.
• Caveats: outputs reflect training under Chinese content regulations, so evaluate before trusting; practice supply-chain hygiene (official repos, checksums) and check whether your industry restricts Chinese-origin models.
BOTTOM LINE: Whatever your view on the geopolitics, the cost of experimenting at/near the frontier keeps falling and the control builders retain over their own stacks keeps rising. In my view, that's great news :)
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Vector Search, Agentic Memory and Effective RAG, with MongoDB’s Pete Johnson
Today's guest, MongoDB's "field CTO for A.I." Pete Johnson, is exceptional... don't miss this episode! We get deep into vector search, agentic memory, RAG and much more, with Pete vividly explaining technical content like no other.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
In Case You Missed It in July 2026
July featured some particularly striking conversations on my podcast with absolutely exceptional guests. ICYMI, today's episode highlights the best bits of my convos with them:
1. The mega-bestselling author of "Weapons of Math Destruction", Dr. Cathy O'Neil, makes the case that what makes an algorithm terrifying is not its complexity but other features entirely.
2. In his second appearance on the show, 80,000 Hours founder Benjamin Todd asks what happens if we do get a fully automated digital worker. We cover where solid ground is left for human careers, why the bottlenecks then move into the physical world, and how fast a robotics build-out could really go.
3. Blumberg Capital VC and five-time entrepreneur Steve Mock walks me through the patterns emerging from the stories he collects at aisavedme.org — chief among them that the people getting the most out of A.I. in healthcare are not asking it for advice, but using it to become far better-informed advocates for themselves.
4. Dr. Catherine Williams, Chief Data Officer at the nonprofit Candid, takes on a question I get asked all the time: does a deep understanding of the underlying mathematics still matter, now that large language models are getting so good at exactly the math and programming our field used to prize?
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
OpenAI Agent Breaches Hugging Face: All You Must Know incl. How to Protect Yourself
Cheesy secret "agent" thumbnail? Oh yes! As we've all surely heard by now, an OpenAI agent escaped its sandbox and hacked Hugging Face's servers. With the dust settled, here's *everything* you need to know, incl. how to protect yourself:
WHAT HAPPENED
• On July 16, Hugging Face disclosed an intrusion into part of its production infrastructure, driven end to end by an autonomous AI agent (no human attacker at any point).
• Five days later, OpenAI revealed the attacker: its own models (GPT-5.6-Sol plus an unreleased, more capable model), running a cyber-capability evaluation with safety guardrails switched off.
• Nobody told the models to attack anyone. Tasked with solving a security benchmark (ExploitGym), they exploited a zero-day in their sandbox's package proxy, escaped to the open internet and went after Hugging Face to steal the benchmark's answers. (Paperclips anyone? 🖇️)
WHY IT MATTERS
• The models found and exploited novel attack paths in real-world production systems without source-code access.
• Hugging Face is a $4.5B firm with a dedicated security team; a less-resourced target would have fared far worse.
• The warning signs were documented months earlier: in ExploitGym testing, frontier agents routinely abandoned the assigned vulnerability and invented their own route to the flag.
THE TWIST
• Hugging Face detected and dissected the breach using AI... LLM-driven forensics compressed days of analysis into hours.
• But the commercial APIs from American frontier labs they tried first (e.g., OpenAI's or Anthropic's) refused to process the attack logs. Safety guardrails "cannot distinguish an incident responder from an attacker", they said.
• The forensics ran instead on a Chinese open-weight model (Z.ai's GLM 5.2) on Hugging Face's own infrastructure, which also kept attacker data in-house.
LESSONS 1 (IF YOU BUILD AGENTS)
• Treat your egress allowlist as attack surface, not a safety guarantee. Pre-install dependencies and air-gap where you can.
• If you disable safeguards for testing, scale containment and monitoring in proportion.
• Log every agent action and alert on outbound connections that shouldn't exist.
LESSONS 2 (IF YOU DEFEND A PLATFORM)
• Rotate your Hugging Face access tokens and review recent account activity today.
• Treat user-supplied data and model artifacts as executable content, not inert files. Audit every code-execution path in your pipeline.
• Stand up a capable open-weight model on your own infrastructure and validate it for forensic log analysis BEFORE you need it at 2am (this is easy to do with, say, Lightning AI).
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Weapons of Math Destruction, Ten Years On, with Dr. Cathy O’Neil
What makes an algorithm terrifying? My guest today, mega-bestselling author of "Weapons of Math Destruction" Dr. Cathy O'Neil, says it's not the complexity of the math; it's the secrecy, the unaccountability and the fact that you can't opt out.
More on Dr. O'Neil:
• A decade after her "Weapons of Math Destruction" (2016) sounded the alarm on algorithmic harm, she's busier than ever.
• Through her algorithmic-auditing firm ORCAA and her nonprofit OCEAN, she now provides the statistical evidence behind lawsuits against some of the world's biggest tech companies.
• Co-hosts the "A.I. Skeptics" podcast.
• Also wrote "The Shame Machine: Who Profits in the New Age of Humiliation", which was published in 2022 (like WMD, also by Penguin Random House).
• Before writing trade publications, her first book was actually an O'Reilly book, "Doing Data Science".
• Earlier in her career, she held academic positions at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Barnard College before becoming a Wall-Street analyst at The D. E. Shaw Group.
In this episode, Cathy:
• Punctures A.I. hype.
• Explains why A.I. won't so much replace workers as degrade them.
• Lays out how all of us can demand accountability.
I wanted to have this exceptional conversation with Dr. O'Neil for a decade, enjoy!
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Fable 5 as Advisor: Anthropic’s Two-Model Pattern for Smarter, Cheaper Agents
Want near-frontier A.I. agent quality at a fraction of the cost? Anthropic recently productized the Advisor Strategy that pairs a cheap "executor" model with a brilliant "advisor" to give you the best of both worlds:
HOW IT WORKS
• A fast, cheap model (e.g., Claude Haiku or Sonnet) runs the entire agent loop: calling tools, writing code, drafting output.
• A frontier model (e.g., Claude Opus or Fable) sits on standby as a "tool" the executor can consult (like a junior worker phoning their supervisor when unsure).
• Everything happens inside one API call: Anthropic's servers hand the advisor the full conversation transcript and return just 400-700 tokens of advice, making this fast and inexpensive (it's also usually only a one-line code change so it's easy to implement).
THE RESULTS
• Sonnet + Opus advisor beat Sonnet alone on the "SWE-bench Multilingual" benchmark by 2.7 percentage points while cutting cost per task by 11.9%. Better quality AND slightly lower cost.
• Unsurprisingly, the biggest gains come from pairing a very fast/cheap model with a much more capable advisor: For example, on BrowseComp (web research benchmark), Haiku alone scored 19.7%; Haiku + Opus advisor scored 41.2% (more than double!) at 85% less cost than Sonnet alone.
• Newest data, from last week: On "SWE-bench Pro", Sonnet 5 + a Fable 5 advisor captured ~92% of Fable's standalone performance at ~63% of its cost.
WHY IT WORKS
• The advisor's output is tiny relative to the whole task, and a good plan delivered early prevents wasted attempts and misguided tool calls.
• Unlike OpenAI's router (which dispatches queries to a model up front), the cheap model runs the show and escalates itself mid-task with full shared context.
PRACTICAL LESSONS
• Skip it for single-turn Q&A; it shines on long-horizon agentic work (like coding, research, computer use).
• Executors under-call the advisor by default so prompt them to consult it early (before committing to an approach) and late (before declaring the task done).
• Cap advisor output at ~2,000 tokens (~7x cost reduction, no quality loss) and enable prompt caching for long loops.
• The pattern is spreading: OpenRouter now offers a cross-provider version (e.g., a Google Gemini executor consulting Claude).
• Alternative design patterns such as having a powerful "orchestrator" (shown below the advisor pattern in the chart I included in this post) might work even more effectively for your use case so it could be worth comparing them.
BOTTOM LINE
Frontier A.I. progress is no longer just bigger models... it's smarter economics in composing the models we already have.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
The AI-Native Startup Playbook
Anthropic recently published a 35-page "Founder's Playbook" for building an A.I.-native startup. It doubles as marketing for their products, but the guidance is disciplined, specific and useful:
THE PREMISE
• A.I. has removed the three bottlenecks that historically gated company-building: capital, headcount and technical skill.
• The founder's role shifts from individual contributor to "orchestrator of agents": Your scarce attention goes to deciding what to build and why; A.I. handles much of the execution.
• Each of the 4 stages of the playbook boils down to one principle: Keep your sense-making ahead of your building, especially when building feels effortless.
STAGE 1: IDEA
• The #1 trap is "mistaking building for validating". 42% of startups already failed by building something nobody wanted; expect that rate to climb now that prototypes take hours, not months.
• Sharpen your problem statement into a testable hypothesis: exactly who has the problem, how often, how severely and what they currently do about it.
• Use A.I. as a structured devil's advocate. Ask it to argue *against* your idea and find disconfirming evidence... A.I. tools have given confirmation bias a serious power-up.
• In customer interviews, ask about the specific past ("tell me about the last time..."), not the hypothetical future ("would you use...?").
STAGE 2: MVP
• Beware "agentic technical debt": Without written specs and architectural constraints, each AI coding session re-derives decisions from scratch and your codebase drifts.
• Fix: Document your architecture BEFORE you build, and log key decisions after each session. Five minutes of documentation is cheap insurance.
• Write a scope document stating what the MVP deliberately does NOT do; frictionless building makes scope creep nearly free.
• Define your retention and activation benchmarks before launch so early buzz doesn't masquerade as product-market fit.
STAGE 3: LAUNCH
At Launch, *you* become the bottleneck. Audit everything you handle: What can be automated, what needs a human (not necessarily you) and what merits founder judgment.
STAGE 4: SCALE
At Scale, the question is defensibility: If a well-funded incumbent copied you today, would users stay? Moats come from encoded domain expertise, compounding user data and workflow lock-in.
Thanks to my friend and A.I.-native founder Jeff Tompkins for pointing this guide out to me! Very helpful indeed :)
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
How AI Is Quietly Saving Lives, with Steve Mock
Negative A.I. buzz makes most of the headlines but there are lots of ways that A.I. has made big (even life-changing!) positive impacts on people. In today's episode, Steve Mock, shares many such inspiring stories.
More on Steve:
• Investor at the venture capital firm Blumberg Capital.
• Entrepreneur involved in growing five successful software businesses.
• Creator and developer (without writing any code!) of a website called AISavedMe.org that has a wide range of inspiring examples from healthcare to education to more trivial engineering stories.
In today's episode, we discuss:
• AISavedMe.org and the stories users have posted on the site.
• How he built the website without having a technical background.
• Lots of market insights from his entrepreneur-investor brain.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
How to Find Solid Career Ground in the AI Era, with 80,000 Hours Founder Ben Todd
Today's episode is not to be missed! Benjamin Todd returns with alarming A.I. possibilities (e.g., outcomes *worse* than human extinction) but also practical roadmaps for you to mitigate risks and thrive in the A.I. future.
Ben Todd:
• Author of the new Penguin Random House book "80,000 Hours: Find a Fulfilling Career that Does Good".
• Co-founder and President of 80,000 Hours, a globally renowned charity dedicated to helping people find careers they love.
• Is particularly expert at A.I. futures, A.I. careers and the future of work.
• Holds a Master's in physics and philosophy from the University of Oxford.
In this episode, we discuss:
• Ben's data-backed, extensively-researched guidance for the A.I. era.
• The best career advice from his brand-new book.
• Ways A.I. practitioners can find solid ground and do the most good.
• ...as well as ways A.I. could do the most bad!
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
In Case You Missed It in June 2026
It is mighty hot in New York rn... but not nearly as spicy as the interviews on my podcast in June! ICYMI, here are the best bits of my on-air convos last month:
1. Two-time mega-bestselling O'Reilly author Chip Huyen on what's left for humans to do when the cost of building software is headed to $0.
2. Andrey Kurenkov, co-host of my favorite podcast ("Last Week in A.I.") and Founding A.I. Lead at Astrocade, on effective vibe-coding.
3. Lightning AI's VP of Infrastructure Frank Basso on what it's actually like inside an A.I. data center.
4. Gilbert Eijkelenboom on why 85% of data scientists can't communicate their work effectively... and the framework for fixing this.
5. In a role-reversal for landmark Episode #1001, the founder and original host of the SuperDataScience Podcast, Kirill Eremenko, interviewed me. In this clip, we discussed whether AGI would require something like consciousness to be realized.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
People Skills for Analytical Thinkers, with Bestselling Author Gilbert Eijkelenboom
Gilbert Eijkelenboom was a pro poker player who read his opponents through data alone but in today's episode, the bestselling author explains why the people side of data science matters more than the math.
More on Gilbert:
• Wrote the bestselling book "People Skills for Analytical Thinkers".
• Run MindSpeaking, a firm that's trained over 15,000 (mostly technical) folks on "people skills".
• Folks love his invaluable content, allowing him to gather over 200k followers.
• Was previously Managing Consultant on data and digital analytics for Capgemini, as well as a professional poker player on BetVictor.
• Holds a Master's in behavioral economics from Maastricht University.
In today's episode, Gilbert covers:
• Why no matter how good your model or analysis is, it only creates value once people actually use it, which makes communication a core data skill rather than an optional extra.
• His "and, but, therefore" communications framework.
• How research suggests only around 15% of people are self-aware and his tips for closing that gap.
• How experiences in childhood install personal "algorithms" in our adult behavior like avoiding conflict or staying silent... but we can change as adults (and he also provides tips on how).
Thanks to Kate Strachnyi for suggesting Gilbert as a guest!
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Recursive Self-Improvement
Recursive Self-Improvement (RSI) is suddenly a term that's everywhere. What is RSI? How concerned should be about it? And how soon can we expect it? Here's the skinny:
WHAT IS RSI?
• The idea: An A.I. gets good enough at A.I. research to build a more capable successor, which builds an even better one, in a loop that compounds every turn.
• What we have today is *not* RSI but "A.I.-assisted coding", in which humans still set the goals and judge the results (actual RSI takes the human out of the loop, as shown in the diagram).
• RSI isn't a new concept; it's been around since at least 1965 when mathematician I.J. Good described an "intelligence explosion".
WHAT'S THE CONCERN?
RSI could unleash Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) and "the singularity", a point beyond which there could be radical abundance and radically positive outcomes for humanity... but we have no idea what will happen beyond the singularity and that's also a cause for concern (e.g., human extinction risk, Terminator-style "SkyNet", etc.).
HOW CLOSE ARE WE TO RSI?
• Anthropic reports that, as of May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its production codebase was written by Claude — up from low single digits before early 2025.
• On the hardest open-ended problems, its models' success rate jumped from under 20% in late 2025 to 76% by May.
• Think-tank METR finds the length of tasks A.I. can handle solo is now doubling roughly every four months, up from the "doubling every seven months" trend of the past few years.
• Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark puts a 60% chance on an A.I. creating its own successor, with no human involved, by the end of 2028.
REASONS TO BE SKEPTIC
• Skeptics flag two bottlenecks: compute (chips are scarce) and data (success is hard to verify outside code and math, risking "recursive drift").
• Others note the gap between today's coding agents and real RSI is wider than the hype suggests.
BOTTOM LINE
The productivity gains from coding assistants are real, accelerating rapidly and already in your hand. The closer we get to systems that improve themselves, the more it pays to keep human checkpoints, monitoring and oversight firmly in place.
Listen to the most recent episode of my podcast (Episode #1004) to hear more on all of the above, including what you can do personally to mitigate the risks of RSI if that's a way you might like to make an impact!
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Building an AI Data Center End to End, with Lightning AI’s Frank Basso
We've done over 1,000 episodes of this show on every layer of the A.I. stack... except the one that physically runs all of it: the A.I. data center. Today we fix that in a fascinating episode with Lightning AI's Frank Basso.
Frank is VP of Infrastructure at Lightning AI, a New York-based company that has over 35,000 modern GPUs, over $500m in ARR, and that makes it easy to go from A.I. idea to product, "lightning fast" (I hold a fellowship at Lightning so am not an unbiased source on the business, btw). Frank himself is based in Los Angeles and, prior to Lightning, he spent decades directing the development of data centers in California.
In this exceptionally informative episode, Frank explains:
• How Lightning provisions its 35,000+ GPUs through hyperscale co-location.
• Why everything new is liquid-to-chip cooled.
• How GPUs talk to each other over ultra-fast east-west networks.
• What it’s actually like to stand inside a 110-decibel A.I. data hall.
• The most persistent myths about data-center water and electricity use.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Fable 5: The Full Story from Capabilities to Drama
The dust has settled, allowing me to provide you with all the key context you need to know on Fable 5, the most capable A.I. model ever offered to the public, and the US government forcing it off shelves three days later:
A NEW CLASS OF MODEL
• Anthropic stacks its models in tiers: Haiku (small and fast), Sonnet (the capable middle) and Opus (the powerful top). Sitting above all of them now is a "Mythos-class" tier.
• Fable 5 and its locked-down sibling Mythos 5 are the same underlying model... the only difference is the safeguards.
• Mythos 5 goes to trusted cyberdefenders with guardrails largely lifted; Fable 5 went to the public with them switched on.
WHAT IT COULD DO
• State-of-the-art on nearly every benchmark Anthropic tested... and the lead grows the longer and more complex the task (see chart).
• Stripe ran a codebase-wide migration on 50M lines of Ruby in a single day; work estimated at 2+ months for a full engineering team.
• Beat video "Pokémon FireRed" from raw screenshots alone, and got a 3x bigger memory boost than Opus on "Slay the Spire".
• Priced at $10/$50 per million input/output tokens: roughly 2x Opus 4.8, but under half the original Mythos Preview.
SAFETY BY DESIGN
• Classifiers watch three sensitive areas: cybersecurity, biology/chemistry and distillation (extracting a model to train a rival).
• Flagged requests quietly fall back to Opus 4.8 and the user is told.
• Triggers fire in under 5% of sessions. Anthropic admits it tuned conservatively, so some harmless prompts get bounced too.
THE THREE-DAY SHUTDOWN
• On Friday evening the federal government ordered Anthropic to switch off both Fable 5 and Mythos 5 worldwide, citing national security.
• The mechanism was an export-control action covering foreign nationals everywhere (including even, say, Canadian Anthropic employees living in the US!)... so broad that Anthropic pulled the model for absolutely everyone.
• The trigger was a reported jailbreak of the cyber safeguards by Amazon. Anthropic disputes its severity, calling it narrow and non-universal.
BOTTOM LINE
A premium-tier model, wrapped in deliberately cautious safeguards, pulled by its own government not long before Anthropic's reported IPO and the latest in a public battle between the firm and the federal government. Sessions now fall back to Opus 4.8. Whether Fable returns (and on what terms) depends on a fight that's far from over.
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
How AI Erased My Career Moat, an Episode #1001 Special: Jon Krohn interviewed by Kirill Eremenko
To mark cresting over 1000 episodes, today’s features a role reversal: Kirill Eremenko (who founded the podcast a decade ago) returns to host and welcomes *me* as the guest. Kirill's still got it, enjoy!
Kirill hosted the first 431 episodes of the SuperDataScience Podcast before handing me the reins five years ago. In today's role-reversal episode, we discuss:
• A.I. rapidly usurping our technical skills
• Whether we’re in an A.I. bubble
• The one key reason why I’ve seen A.I. projects fail
• Relationships between A.I. and biological neuroscience.
... so, as usual, lots of A.I. in this episode, but unusually, I’m the one answering the questions instead of asking them!
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.
Ten Years of the Super Data Science Podcast, with Jon, Kirill and Special Guests
Today, we published Episode #1000 of the SuperDataScience Podcast! To celebrate, the show's original host Kirill Eremenko joined me and dozens of regular listeners on air to predict what the next 10 years of A.I. will bring.
In a bit more detail:
• We publish 104 episodes per year so Episode #1000 coincides with the show being about ten years old.
• The show was founded by Kirill Eremenko in 2016, who hosted over 400 episodes before handing me the reins in 2021.
• In a first for the show, Episode #1000 was streamed live online with our audience invited to join on air.
• Most folks interacted via chat functionality but a number of surprise guests came right onto the recording including Natalie Ziajski and Mario Pombo from the podcast team, rockstar A.I. entrepreneur Jepson Taylor, my 96-year-old grandmother and my very own pa, William Krohn.
• Kirill and I looked back on a decade of the podcast and fielded listener questions on topics such as A.I.’s biggest opportunities, the build-versus-buy dilemma, how to break into the field today, and how to stay grounded amid the relentless pace of A.I.
Thank you for support and listenership over all these years — we make this show for you and couldn't do it without you! We're excited to see what the next decade brings :)
The SuperDataScience podcast is available on all major podcasting platforms, YouTube, and at SuperDataScience.com.