Expert attention map

The Who's Who of AI

What credible people across AI noticed, why it matters, and where the field is converging or disagreeing.

2,364 searchable experts 2,966 tracked across all sources
Build my stream Create my edition
Filter the conversation Who is saying what?

Combine a professional role with a reaction lens. Both must match the same attributed contribution.

Clear all
New Network reaction maps

See how experts are reacting—not just what they shared.

Posts are grouped by conversation and tone. Select a lens to filter the stream; these are never permanent labels on people.

Opportunity & adoption
1 live reaction map in this view Jump to the evidence ↓
Shared emphasis Introducing Claude Opus 5 Opportunity & adoption · 2 attributable reactions
Showing signals surfaced by Cameron ×
New & accelerating

What is moving across the network now

One card per development. Sources are clustered; reaction bundles describe these posts, never the people behind them.

Established Models & releases Release 4d ago
⚡ 5 h early
Anthropic Claude Opus 5 released

Introducing Claude Opus 5

9 experts across 3 network communities independently surfaced this.

9 experts 3 communities 1 sources clustered
Nathan Lambert Chris Paxton Sung Kim Dustin Moskovitz Eileen Clancy 🧿 Nicole Hennig Cameron Liz Fong-Jones (方禮真) +1
How the network is reacting 2 experts are emphasizing opportunity & adoption.
Shared emphasis

Opportunity & adoption

2 experts

New capabilities, benefits and practical upside.

“Insane numbers for opus 5, the power of faster iteration speed + scaled RL (Fable too big to RL as well, yet). And on safeguards "Based on our testing, we expect the classifiers to intervene around 85% less often than they do for Fable 5.". www.anthropic.co…”

2 experts discussed this · 4 posts
Sung Kim: Anthropic's Opus 5
Sung Kim: www.anthropic.com/news/claude-...
Sung Kim: System card www-cdn.anthropic.com/c5fbac3f0b12...
Open the full discussion →
Primary source anthropic.com ↗
Developing Agents & robotics Signal 2d ago

Spec-Driven Development for AI Coding Agents — cameron.stream

4 experts are actively discussing the implications.

1 expert 1 community 1 sources clustered
Cameron

“cameron.stream/knowledge/sp... slop written but about accurate. It's mostly a workflow thing. Basically, I talk to my agent(s) about the spec first, and then have agents go off on timers to complete a "tick".”

4 experts discussed this · 43 posts
Tim Kellogg: i’m not actually sure this is true. Meaning that spec-driven dev & formal methods haven’t been picked up and there’s probably a reason for it mainly: it’s cheaper & easier to use the code as the si…
Tim Kellogg: people have been saying that it’s best to delete docs after every session and just have an agent rebuild context every time, that way you don’t get confused output tbf the strongest argument agains…
Tim Kellogg: one configuration of formal methods. that could work — use an agent to build a formal spec on the fly, based on what the code *actually* does, and use that to prove liveness, correctness, etc. i co…
Open the full discussion →
Primary source cameron.stream ↗
Debates gaining attention

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

5 experts · 8 posts · 3d ago
Michael Osborne Scott McGrath Cameron tachikoma brennan
Multiple readings Concern & critique · 1 Building & implementation · 1
tachikoma: the labs are power-seeking entities, and there is little to no power here
tachikoma: i'd say there's a foundation, or framework, from which something with power might emerge in the future. the labs don't care to nurture that, but reap what already exists on mature platforms.
Open the thread →
2 experts · 4 posts · 1d ago
Ted Underwood Cameron
Ted Underwood: It's 243,000, but hey — directionally correct!
Ted Underwood: Yep. But tech news and updates *about AI*, and I keep an AI-generated banner image specifically so I stay blocked by people who feel strongly about policing other peoples' use of computers. Good fe…
Open the thread →