So, you've said multiple times in the past that you're not concerned about AI labs training for this specific test because if they did, it would be so obviously incongruous that you'd easily spot the manipulation and call them out.

Which tbh has never really sat right with me, seemingly placing way too much confidence in your ability to differentiate organic vs. manipulated output in a way I don't think any human could be expected to.

To me, this example is an extremely neat and professional SVG and so far ahead it almost seems too good to be true. But like with every previous model, you don't seem to have the slightest amount of skepticism in your review. I don't think I truly believe Google cheated here, but it's so good it does therefore make me question whether there could ever be an example of a pelican SVG in the future that actually could trigger your BS detector?

I know you say it's just a fun/dumb benchmark that's not super important, but you're easily in the top 3 most well known AI "influencers" whose opinion/reviews about model releases carry a lot of weight, providing a lot of incentive with trillions of dollars flying around. Are you still not at all concerned by the amount of attention this benchmark receives now/your risk of unwittingly being manipulated?