Where the AI market is talking

A 'bananas' order for 5000 obscure book titles fuels suspicion

There are, but, quoting from the article: > Anthropic said: "None of our data acquisition programmes buy and destroy rare or antiquarian books." This statement was clearly carefully worded, using the words "rare or antiquarian" to mean "pre-1966, pre-ISBN". Their statement is answering a question that wasn't asked, so that (if they need to) they can claim in the future that they never said they weren't destroying books with ISBNs.

Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model

The XML tags are similar to <antml:xxx>, which is obviously Anthropic ML (or ANTrophic xML). I think it’s likely 3; meta in reverse. While tokenisers and preprocessing can catch it, you want your special tokens to be unique and not present in the original corpus. <meta: is likely too common.

A 'bananas' order for 5000 obscure book titles fuels suspicion

Is this a second form of AI psychosis, as in AI training corpus psychosis? The need for all the content, Moar!! Feed me. Is this the Paperclip Maximiser in the form of the Training Material Maximiser? Will it be that, in the end, the lack of "Pass Your Driving Test, 2018 Edition" was the cause of driving rule hallucinations in all previous models? Will this finally get OpenAI back in front of Anthropic? Hurrah! We found it!

A 'bananas' order for 5000 obscure book titles fuels suspicion

Is this a second form of AI psychosis, as in AI training corpus psychosis? The need for all the content, Moar!! Feed me. Is this the Paperclip Maximiser in the form of the Training Material Maximiser? Will it be that, in the end, the lack of "Pass Your Driving Test, 2018 Edition" was the cause of driving rule hallucinations in all previous models? Will this finally get OpenAI back in front of Anthropic? Hurrah! We found it!

Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model

I've seen it here on HN (it's particularly noticeable via the /active page) multiple times. If Google, OpenAI or Anthropic release something significant, odds are good you'll see a headline from one of the others.

Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model

I've seen it here on HN (it's particularly noticeable via the /active page) multiple times. If Google, OpenAI or Anthropic release something significant, odds are good you'll see a headline from one of the others.

Auto mode is now the default in Claude Code

> guy Summer Yue, she. > Metaverse Zuckerberg may indeed be hiring people who are less than the best, same for Musk, but the people they hire are making the UX that the rest of us have to put up with. Given I keep reading claims about heavy agentic coding use at Anthropic, and given what I experience while using ChatGPT, those companies are vibing the UX that the rest of us have to put up with.

I'm leaving OpenAI to build Jurassic Park

Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model

Yeah, it does feel a bit silly with my encrypted disks, encrypted backups, unique passwords, advanced router, etc, while I send everything I do in plain text to anthropic.

Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model

I don't understand the desire to run own AI models for programming locally. No laptop is ever going to be as powerful and energy efficient to run anything close to OpenAI, Anthropic or Google models. A model you can run on a loptop is simply not going to work as well as it's needed for programming. Small models for linguistic work fine, but anything more sophisticated simply won't provide enough resources or power. Or models would need to be significantly dumbed down - then why use them at all? So far the idea of carrying a "thin" or "thin"-like device looks more reasonable to me, while running AI on your own server.

Meta Muse Glimmer – open weights 30B local coding model

I don't understand the desire to run own AI models for programming locally. No laptop is ever going to be as powerful and energy efficient to run anything close to OpenAI, Anthropic or Google models. A model you can run on a loptop is simply not going to work as well as it's needed for programming. Small models for linguistic work fine, but anything more sophisticated simply won't provide enough resources or power. Or models would need to be significantly dumbed down - then why use them at all? So far the idea of carrying a "thin" or "thin"-like device looks more reasonable to me, while running AI on your own server.

Show HN: Voice driven murder mystery, Interview AI suspects with your voice

Hiiiii, i would appreciate your feedback now that I resolved the openai issue. I think you will be surprised. I was!

Show HN: Voice driven murder mystery, Interview AI suspects with your voice

I have no idea how to do that, but yes, as someone else noted, OpenAI might!

Show HN: Voice driven murder mystery, Interview AI suspects with your voice

OpenAI credits ran out! Resolved!

Show HN: Voice driven murder mystery, Interview AI suspects with your voice

Oops, ran out of OpenAI credits

Show HN: Voice driven murder mystery, Interview AI suspects with your voice

Ran out of OpenAI credits, resolved now

Show HN: Voice driven murder mystery, Interview AI suspects with your voice

Sorry! Ran out of OpenAI credits, resolved now

Managing AI Coding Costs at Scale

Currently the bad quality of architecture and holistic view of models is probably explained by the fact that the models just cannot do it. Free markets and China will make sure of that, kind of. In reality Claude and Codex are better and provide much better tooling, so not much competition from free markets and self-hosted models from China, I think. Then when competition really settles to monoploy or duopoly, like it always does in bigtech, it is really difficult to prove Anthropic and OpenAI enshittify their models. Same with Opus 4.6, that suddenly was worse when 4.7 came out.

Managing AI Coding Costs at Scale

Currently the bad quality of architecture and holistic view of models is probably explained by the fact that the models just cannot do it. Free markets and China will make sure of that, kind of. In reality Claude and Codex are better and provide much better tooling, so not much competition from free markets and self-hosted models from China, I think. Then when competition really settles to monoploy or duopoly, like it always does in bigtech, it is really difficult to prove Anthropic and OpenAI enshittify their models. Same with Opus 4.6, that suddenly was worse when 4.7 came out.

What Happened to HackerOne?

I've disclosed vulns across just about every industry — banking, healthcare, oil & gas, government, cybersecurity, etc -- and to some of the largest companies in the world, OpenAI, Salesforce and Google. I've been doing this for nearly 20 years. Most of my research starts with: _There is absolutely no way this works_. Then it works. I've been thinking that a lot more lately. Companies and hackers are both heavily incentivised to reduce the friction involved in vulnerability disclosure, particularly for large organisations. The platforms are good enough now. They're email in 2007: imperfect, occasionally frustrating, but substantially better than what came before. They make SLAs possible. They provide structure and administration. Things still go wrong — companies stop responding, analysts…