Sound critique. I'll add that the Artificial Analysis intelligence index is not considered a good metric for intelligence anymore. Most of the benchmarks that it comprises are saturated or considered low signal today.

What is considered a good metric?

Personally, a combination of low tech and semi scientific tests based on what you normally do (redo the same task you used an older model for with a newer one).

So far, Simon Willison's pelican bike "benchmark" is the only one I've found that shows Fable 5.1 beating Opus 5.5. My personal experience has been Opus is unusable on design work it's so terrible. Evaluating whether we should consolidate AWS DMS tasks (Postgres full load and change data capture) into fewer tasks with more tables, Opus 5.5 was factually wrong and needed correction roughly every other turn.

On a "help me find a sandbox solution for agents embedded in a web app to run untrusted code" research project it kept misrepresenting security boundaries and ended up recommending DuckDB which ironically specifically says it does not provide a strong security boundary in its own documentation. GPT 6 (can't remember if it was Sol or Astra) and Fable 5.1 both recommended FaaS like Cloudflare Workers and AWS Lambda which fit fairly well with the requirements.

I switched from Opus to Fable in the session going badly sideways and told it to "Review the previous conversation and come up with a correct comparison table and corrected recommendations grounded in objectivity supported by citations. Do research as necessary to understand the current ecosystem" and that was a full 180 back to coherency...

Nice claudish! It's crazy how obviously human made this comment is, despite the superficial similarities to Claude. It truly has a distinct style.

Interesting! My impression was that this was an artifact of RLVR where this slightly preferred writing style got amplified to the nth degree. It's probably some mix.

Docker containers use Linux kernel features to create an isolated environment, running on the same machine as docker is. This creates a virtual machine, with its own kernel, and runs the container in there. This gives stronger isolation and security guarantees.

I have the same question as GP. Your answer helps a little but not really. I might be naive, but I was under the impression that malicious code escaping a docker image and running amok on my host system was not something I should be too worried about. Especially if I run docker in rootless mode. Is that wrong?

For clarity I’m actually using podman, not Docker.

Oh no, you should definitely be worried about that. Podman might make it harder to escalate to host root, or manipulate other containers, but it is still vulnerable.

Now I'm curious to know how hardened the Docket Sandbox orchestration interface is. I guess we can assume they have run Mythos against it for a few weeks maybe? It's unclear.

Unsettling. I mean, is there any reasonable way to develop software in 2026? I've already sworn off ever installing npm directly on my host. Containerizing everything is laborious enough, but running a separate VM for everything?

You just need to work out the threat model for what you're working on. For trusted containerized workloads, where the attack surface is minimal, just containerization is fine. However, agents can do just about anything on your computer if you allow it and people aren't really shying away from `--dangerously-skip-permissions`, so better hardening (VMs, microVMs) is desirable.

LLMs are great at finding 0-day, and people are rubbish at updating their containers and hosts to patch b-day.

Containers have access to the kernel ABI, and as shown in the latest kernel exploits, all the memory handling surface that exposes. The virtualisation interface, offering fewer services, is significantly harder.

Containers are obviously lighter than VMs, both to start and to schedule, but firecracker is pretty fast. gVisor pays overhead per syscall vs at startup.

So yeah, more vulnerable.

Who do you think created firecracker? gVisor?

gvisor's overhead is mostly IO. especially if you use the KVM backend.

That depends on the runtime though. For example, libkrun lets you do this:

    docker run --runtime krun hello-world

That starts/runs the OCI in a qemu microvm.

When the host is a Mac or window , docker always run in a VM anyway.

On Linux, you can run docker directly on the host, but you can also very easily setup a vm with incus and run docker from there.

That can only be true if the workload is compute bound, not memory bandwidth bound.

Iceland has mostly been governed by the center right conservative independence party, which has been quick to sell land and resources to anyone interested. Kárahnjúkar is the canonical example of this, a huge hydro plant powering aluminium smelters owned by a foreign company.

Right now, different parties have the majority rule, and their interest in projects like these are not clear. I would suspect that a motivated investor could fairly easily get them built. The hurdles would be logistics and connectivity much more than red tape.

Iceland is culturally and politically scandinavian with some influence from the US. In august there will be a vote to start accession talks with the EU. This has been a heavily contested issue for years, largely due to Iceland's unique resources.

Is there anything of value in this project?

It sounds interesting at a glance, but it seems to be AI slop. So it's hard to tell if there are any interesting discoveries there, or just some worthless results described with performatively advanced language.

Have you tried Qwen 3.6 or Gemma 4? They're not frontier level but certainly have their uses.

Yes, they work great for small tasks, but not smart and powerful enough to beat with frontier models. Hope they will become better.

Note that your monitor is a QD-OLED, not a QLED monitor.

Despite the similar names, these are two very different technologies. QD-OLED is a OLED panel that uses QD (quantum dots) to achieve a wide color gamut. QLED is a LED backlit LCD panel that uses QD in a similar way.

The difference in performance characteristics of these two panel types is dominated by the difference between OLED and LCD.

That HN agent review is pretty usable. Very cool!

Thank you!