> Your logic is flawed because, a thing can improve for an infinite amount of time while never surpassing a certain limit. It's called an asymptote.
Have you ever once looked at a METR chart? https://files.civai.org/assets/METR_Chart.jpg
That's not an asymptote.
> there's also the fundamental fact that performance on benchmarks is not the same thing as performance in the real world
Again, yes, you're correct in the general case but it has very little to do with the specific case.
Would you find it convincing if I simply said "some internet arguments are wrong"? It's certainly a true statement, and you've made an internet argument here, so clearly you should accept that you're wrong, right?
You're scoring rhetorical points while talking past my entire comment. Hard to say if you even read it.
I'm not "convincing" anyone of anything. I'm stating the reasons that I, personally, am unconvinced of a specific claim being made to me.
I mean, I quoted multiple passages and established why I think your logic is flawed. If you're convinced by bad logic, so be it.
If you read my entire comment and thought that showing me a benchmark chart remotely addresses the point I'm making, well... I don't know what to tell you.
It's such a shame that you lack any ability to clarify your point - I guess it really wasn't a very good one. I'm not sure why you keep trying to convince me simply by telling me I'm wrong, without providing any information or counter-arguments?