It's that time. It's been a hell of a year.

At the start we barely had reasoning models. Now we have Claude Code and Opus 4.5.

I don’t code. Yet now I cause code to exist whenever something about a website annoys me, or when I get that programmer's realization that there's something I am planning on doing at least three times. Because why not?

The progress has simultaneously been mind bogglingly impressive and fast. But a lot of people don’t see it that way, because progress has been incremental, and because we were reasonably expecting to often get even more than this.

The public conversation and debate, even more than before, was full of false narratives and active attempts to make the situation worse. The same goes for attempts to shape Federal policy towards AI, and OpenAI's conversion into a for-profit.

It's been, as they say, one battle after another, with many wins, many setbacks and a lot of things in between.

This includes the key developments in AI, and also other blog posts from the year that I consider memorable looking back.

This is only our corner of the world's [...]

---

Outline:

(01:26) January

(03:50) February

(06:58) March

(08:15) April

(09:24) May

(11:06) June

(12:02) July

(13:04) August

(15:23) September

(15:50) October

(18:39) November

(20:12) December

(21:39) Questions For Next Season

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Ultimately, it comes down to one question. Are you in? For you, and for them.

You’re Single Because They Got The Ick

The Ick, the ultimate red flag, makes perfect sense and is all about likelihood ratios.

Koenfucius: The ‘ick’ is a colloquial term for a feeling of disgust triggered by a specific—typically trivial—behaviour from a romantic partner, often leading to the relationship's demise. New research explores why some are more prone to getting it than others.

Robin Hanson: “Women also experienced the ick more frequently, with 75% having had the ick compared to 57% of men … Those with a higher tendency for disgust … [&] grandiose narcissism was linked to stronger ick reactions, as was holding partners to exceptionally high standards.”

Paul Graham: About 30% of Seinfeld episodes were about this.

One gets The Ick because a small act is evidence of one's general nature. The right type of person would never do [X], ideally never want to do [X], and at minimum would have learned not to do [X]. Often this is because they would know this is indicative of attribute [Y]. Indeed, if they should be aware that [X] [...]

---

Outline:

(00:18) You're Single Because They Got The Ick

(02:53) You Are Still Single Because You Are Inventing Red Flags

(05:10) You're Still Single Because You Demand The Same Generic Things

(06:51) You're Single Because Everyone Is Too Picky

(08:46) You're Single And They Will Never Tell You Why

(10:19) You're Single Because You Won't Tell Them The Problem

(12:12) You're Not Single But The Clock Is Ticking

(13:21) You're Single Because of Your Bodycount

(15:11) You're Single Because You Failed To Read The Signs

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Here's to everyone having a great 2026 in all ways, so I figured what better way to end the year than with a little practical advice. Like everything else, dating is a skill. Practice makes perfect. It helps to combine it with outside analysis, to help you on your quest to Just Do Things.

You’re Single Because You Lack Reps

A common theme in these roundups is that the best thing you can do as a young man, to get better at dating and set yourself up for success, is to get out there and engage in deliberate practice.

Cartoons Hate Her: Today I wrote about some of the worst dating advice that young men get. Namely, the advice to delay dating or relationships until they’ve “built themselves,” usually into their 30s.

Getting dating experience- even when it clearly doesn’t matter- builds social skills and confidence. It's not something you want to deliberately defer. Dating *is* working on yourself.

Zac Hill: Hard true and also generally applicable. Niko Canner told me a variant of this when I was about to work at Bridgewater to ‘acquire skills’:

“what job are you acquiring skills for?”

---

Outline:

(00:30) You're Single Because You Lack Reps

(03:00) You're Single And Didn't Even Shoot Your Shot

(04:34) You're Single Because You Didn't Ask To Hold Her Hand

(07:56) You're Single Because You're Afraid People Will Mock You Online

(13:19) You're Single Because You Didn't Confirm Your Date

(19:06) You're Single Because You Didn't Have Your Big Moment At The Prom

(20:51) You're Single Because Board Games Came Between You

(22:26) You're Single Because You Can't Dance

(23:11) You're Single And Should Try Punching

(24:03) You're Single Because You Don't Send Out Receptive Energy

(25:55) You're Single Because You're A Depressed Comedian

(26:46) You're Single Because You Didn't Hand It To Her

(27:28) You're Single And Need The Right Reward Function

(28:11) You're Single So Focus On The Basics

(29:48) You're Not Single Anymore

(31:11) You're Single Because You Don't Just Do Things

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

The Revolution of Rising Requirements has many elements. The most onerous are the supervisory requirements on children. They have become, as Kelsey Piper recently documented, completely, utterly insane, to the point where:

Whereas I think that if you don’t allow your 10-year-old to play alone in a park, that is a much better (although still quite bad) potential reason for a CPS investigation.

This is not an idle threat, per the common statistic that around 35% of American families get investigated by CPS. Even if you are confident that will ultimately turn out fine, and given the vagaries and insanities one can never fully be sure, the process is already the punishment.

As Kelsey Piper says [...]

---

Outline:

(01:47) We Don't Let Kids Be Kids

(03:42) Let Your Children Play

(05:36) The Algorithm of Fear

(07:33) The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Fear Itself

(11:48) No Means No

(14:20) Child Abduction Is Either Custody Disputes Or Government Intervention

(17:29) Stranger Danger Danger

(20:39) The Before Times

(21:33) Could It Be... Murder?

(22:30) The Long Road Home

(22:47) Either Bored Or Happy

(23:53) All Eyes on Me

(27:03) Screens From The Past

(28:50) Medicalization

(31:02) Television

(32:14) Suspiciously Large Effect Size

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Claude Opus 4.5 did so well on the METR task length graph they’re going to need longer tasks, and we still haven’t scored Gemini 3 Pro or GPT-5.2-Codex. Oh, also there's a GPT-5.2-Codex.

At week's end we did finally get at least a little of a Christmas break. It was nice.

Also nice was that New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed the RAISE Act, giving New York its own version of SB 53. The final version was not what we were hoping it would be, but it still is helpful on the margin.

Various people gave their 2026 predictions. Let's put it this way: Buckle up.

Table of Contents

---

Outline:

(00:53) Language Models Offer Mundane Utility

(02:15) Language Models Don't Offer Mundane Utility

(02:55) Huh, Upgrades

(03:21) On Your Marks

(05:15) Claude Opus 4.5 Joins The METR Graph

(12:41) Sufficiently Advanced Intelligence

(15:09) Deepfaketown and Botpocalypse Soon

(18:12) Fun With Media Generation

(22:33) You Drive Me Crazy

(25:29) They Took Our Jobs

(28:45) The Art of the Jailbreak

(28:56) Get Involved

(29:12) Introducing

(32:24) In Other AI News

(33:46) Show Me the Money

(34:44) Quiet Speculations

(38:59) Whistling In The Dark

(40:27) Bubble, Bubble, Toil and Trouble

(42:20) Americans Really Dislike AI

(48:30) The Quest for Sane Regulations

(52:32) Chip City

(55:55) The Week in Audio

(56:45) Rhetorical Innovation

(01:00:53) Aligning a Smarter Than Human Intelligence is Difficult

(01:02:58) Mom, Owain Evans Is Turning The Models Evil Again

(01:06:10) Messages From Janusworld

(01:15:22) The Lighter Side

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Now that I am tracking all the movies I watch via Letterboxd, it seems worthwhile to go over the results at the end of the year, and look for lessons, patterns and highlights.

Last year: Zvi's 2024 In Movies.

The Ratings Scale

You can find all my ratings and reviews on Letterboxd. I do revise from time to time, either on rewatch or changing my mind. I encourage you to follow me there.

Letterboxd ratings go from 0.5-5. The scale is trying to measure several things at once.

5: Masterpiece. All-time great film. Will rewatch multiple times. See this film.

4.5: Excellent. Life is meaningfully enriched. Want to rewatch. Probably see this film.

4: Great. Cut above. Very happy I saw. Happy to rewatch. If interested, see this film.

3.5: Very Good. Actively happy I saw. Added value to my life. A worthwhile time.

3: Good. Happy that I saw it, but wouldn’t be a serious mistake to miss it.

2.5: Okay. Watching this was a small mistake.

2: Bad. I immediately regret this decision. Kind of a waste.

1.5: Very bad. If you caused this to [...]

---

Outline:

(00:24) The Ratings Scale

(02:35) The Five Component Model of Movie Ratings

(04:10) The Numbers

(04:29) Movies Have Decreasing Marginal Returns in Practice

(05:24) Very Briefly on the Top Picks and Whether You Should See Them

(06:47) Other Notes to Self to Remember (Reprise from 2024)

(08:15) The Year of Living Disagreeably

(11:05) I Hate Spoilers With the Fire of a Thousand Suns

(11:26) You Son Of A Bitch, I'm In

(12:36) Theaters Continue To Be Awesome

(13:11) Strong Opinions, Strongly Held: I Didn't Like It

(19:43) Strong Opinions, Strongly Held: I Did Like It

(21:47) Award Show Dreams

(22:28) On To 2026

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Several years ago Zvi Mowshowitz founded Balsa Research, a tiny nonprofit research organization currently focused on quantifying the impact of the Jones Act on the American economy, and working towards viable reform proposals.

While changing century-old policy is not going to be easy, we continue to see many places where there is neglected groundwork that we’re well positioned to do, and we are improving at doing it with another year of practice under our belts.

We’re looking to raise $200,000 to support our work this giving season, though $50,000 would be sufficient to keep the lights on, and we think we are also well positioned to do more with more funding.

Funds raised this round will support Balsa's policy advocacy, either in Jones Act and shipping or potentially in other planned cause areas of housing reform and NEPA reform if there is capacity to significantly expand.

Donate here to fund our mainline policy work.

One additional possibility for Balsa, that would be funded entirely separately if it did happen, is for Zvi Mowshowitz to use Balsa as a piece of philanthropic infrastructure to help guide new philanthropic money coming online in 2026 if there [...]

---

Outline:

(01:34) What Balsa Got Up to in 2025

(05:42) A quick glance at our budget

(06:24) Balsa in 2026, and Our Ask

(07:38) Complete the Jones Act policy binder

(08:12) Receive and publicize findings from the two funded economic studies

(08:33) Fund at least one high-quality study from the labor RFA

(09:09) Continue monitoring Section 301 and SHIPS Act developments, contributing input where it seems high-leverage

(09:56) What Additional Funding Enables

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Balsa Research is a tiny nonprofit research organization currently focused on quantifying the impact of the Jones Act on the American economy, and working towards viable reform proposals.

While changing century-old policy is not going to be easy, we continue to see many places where there is neglected groundwork that we’re well positioned to do, and we are improving at doing it with another year of practice under our belts. We’re looking to raise $200,000 to support our work this giving season, though $50,000 would be sufficient to keep the lights on, and we think we are also well positioned to do more with more funding.

Donations will support Balsa's policy advocacy, either in Jones Act and maritime policy reform or potentially in other planned cause areas (housing reform and NEPA reform) if there is capacity to significantly expand.

Donate here to fund our mainline policy work.

One additional possibility for Balsa, which would be funded entirely separately if it did happen, is for Zvi Mowshowitz to use Balsa as a piece of philanthropic infrastructure to help guide new philanthropic money coming online in 2026 if there is demand. Contact us ([email protected]) if you would like to be involved [...]

---

Outline:

(01:34) What Balsa Did in 2025

(05:45) A quick glance at our budget

(06:27) Balsa in 2026, and Our Ask

(07:41) Complete the Jones Act policy binder

(08:16) Receive and publicize findings from the two funded economic studies

(08:37) Fund at least one high-quality study from the labor RFA

(09:13) Continue monitoring Section 301 and SHIPS Act developments, contributing input where it seems high-leverage

(10:00) What Additional Funding Enables

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Internet arguments like the $140,000 Question incident keep happening.

The two sides say:

The economic data is correct. Real wages are indeed up. Costs for food and clothing are way down while quality is up, housing is more expensive than it should be but is not much more expensive relative to incomes. We really do consume vastly more and better food, clothing, housing, healthcare, entertainment, travel, communications, shipping and logistics, information and intelligence. Most things are higher quality.

But that does not tell us that buying a socially and legally acceptable basket of goods for a family has gotten easier, nor that the new basket will make us happier.

This post is my attempt to reconcile those perspectives.

The culprit is the Revolution of Rising Expectations, together with the Revolution of Rising Requirements.

The biggest rising expectations are that we will not have to tolerate unpleasant experiences or even dead time, endure meaningful material shortages or accept various forms [...]

---

Outline:

(01:34) The Revolutions of Rising Expectations

(04:37) The Revolution of Rising Requirements

(06:52) Whose Line Is It Anyway?

(09:17) Thus In This House We Believe The Following

(10:21) Real De Facto Required Expenses Are Rising Higher Than Inflation

(12:04) Great Expectations

(15:41) We Could Fix It

(16:52) Man's Search For Meaning

(20:06) How Do You Afford Your Rock And Roll Lifestyle?

(22:41) Our Price Cheap

(27:34) It Takes Two (1)

(30:09) It Takes Two (2)

(30:45) If So, Then What Are You Going To Do About It, Punk?

(34:29) The Revolution of Rising Expectations Redux

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

People remember their childhood world too fondly.

You adapt to it. You forget the parts that sucked, many of which sucked rather really badly. It resonates with you and sticks with you. You think it was better.

This is famously true for music, but also in general, including places it makes no sense like ‘most reliable news reporting.’

Matthew Yglesias: Regardless of how old they are, people tend to think that things were better when they were young.

As a result, you’d expect more negativity as the median age goes up and up.

Very obviously these views are not objective.

As a fun and also useful exercise, as part of the affordability sequence, now that we’ve looked at claims of modern impoverishment and asked when things were cheaper, it's time to ask ourselves: When were various things really at their best?

In some aspects, yes, the past was better, and those aspects are an important part of the picture. But in many others today is the day and people are wrong about this.

I’ll start with the things on the above graph, in order, include some claims from another source, and [...]

---

Outline:

(01:38) The Most Close-Knit Communities

(03:02) The Most Moral Society

(04:57) The Least Political Division

(05:31) The Happiest Families

(06:31) The Most Reliable News Reporting

(08:03) The Best Music

(10:07) The Best Radio

(11:13) The Best Fashion

(11:32) The Best Economy

(12:03) The Best Movies

(13:23) The Best Television

(15:00) Best Sporting Events

(17:11) The Best Cuisine

(18:10) Bonus: The Best Job Security

(18:53) The Best Everything

(22:15) The Best Information Sources, Electronics, Medical Care, Dental Care, Medical (and Non-Medical) Drugs, Medical Devices, Home Security Systems, Telephone Services and Mobile Phones, Communication, and Delivery Services of All Kinds

(22:51) The Best Air Travel

(23:33) The Best Cars

(23:59) The Best Roads, Traffic and Infrastructure

(24:53) The Best Transportation

(25:28) It's Getting Better All The Time

(28:41) We Should Be Doing Far Better On All This

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.