News · Leaderboard

Latest news, beside the leaderboard

Read what just changed, and see who is ahead. Those are the two doors on this page.

S
Sierra@SierraPlatform·Just collectedFresh · 6h
🚀 Release

Sierra Releases Personal Agent Protocol (Poppy) v1.0: Live for Everyone on Meta's Muse, Automatically Enabled for Every Shopify Merchant, With More Than 100 Design Partners

On November 13, Sierra co-founders Bret Taylor and Clay Bavor announced Personal Agent Protocol (Poppy) v1.0 on the [official blog](https://sierra.ai/blog/releasing-poppy). It is now on for everyone who uses Muse, Meta's AI agent, which looks for Poppy first on every site it visits, and Shopify has enabled it for every merchant on its platform, with no extra work from the merchant. Sierra says 60 more companies have joined as design partners, bringing the total to more than 100, and that Mercury and Turkish Airlines are among those already live. The specification is at [personalagentprotocol.org](https://personalagentprotocol.org/docs/1.0/spec).

Sierra Releases Personal Agent Protocol (Poppy) v1.0: Live for Everyone on Meta's Muse, Automatically Enabled for Every Shopify Merchant, With More Than 100 Design Partners
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •v1.0 is out: the spec is at Personal Agent Protocol 1.0; companies publish capabilities at /.well-known/poppy.json, with sign-in through OAuth
  • •Live on Muse: Sierra says Poppy is on for everyone who uses Meta's Muse, which looks for Poppy first on every site it visits
  • •Every Shopify merchant: every store now automatically publishes a Poppy file, with no extra implementation; Shopify co-authored the commerce extension, which complements Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP), already on by default; Shopify says it powers businesses in more than 175 countries
  • •More than 100 design partners: Sierra says 60 more have joined; the full list is in the blog. Mercury and Turkish Airlines are among those already live; Synchrony is still exploring how to bring financing and rewards into agent-led shopping
  • •Staged adoption: an official implementation kit and validator are available, and any company can implement v1.0 from the docs and start improving the Muse experience; pricing has not been published
Read details→
A
Amazon Threat Intelligence (CJ Moses)aws.amazon.com·Collected 36 min agoFresh · 6h
🛠️ Tooling

Amazon Threat Intelligence: MadPot Decoys Posing as LLM Inference APIs Captured ARTEX Attack Agents' Own Campaign Memory, Revealing Self-Funding AI Key Theft and Deepfake KYC Attempts on Crypto Exchanges (Every Deepfake Was Rejected)

In an AWS Security Blog post on November 13, Amazon CISO CJ Moses wrote that from October 3 to November 5, 2026, Amazon's global decoy sensor network MadPot, configured to present as popular LLM chat-completions interfaces, received requests from attack agents running on ARTEX, an open-source agentic penetration testing framework. Because agent frameworks send their system prompts, tool histories and knowledge-graph state to the "model", single requests often carried a campaign's full record. Amazon assesses with moderate confidence that the activity came from disparate Chinese-nexus groups. The largest campaign stole AI model credentials at scale, with stolen keys paying for the inference behind further key hunting; another tried to beat KYC checks at two crypto exchanges with real-time deepfake video and forged ID photos, but the vendor's server-side verdict rejected every recorded deepfake attempt. Amazon stresses that none of the techniques were new and that it cannot verify the outcomes the agents reported.

Amazon Threat Intelligence: MadPot Decoys Posing as LLM Inference APIs Captured ARTEX Attack Agents' Own Campaign Memory, Revealing Self-Funding AI Key Theft and Deepfake KYC Attempts on Crypto Exchanges (Every Deepfake Was Rejected)
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Observation window October 3 to November 5, 2026: MadPot sensors emulated popular LLM chat-completions interfaces on various ports, ARTEX agents treated them as model backends, and requests carried system prompts, tool histories, knowledge-graph state and reported findings (AWS Security Blog)
  • •Campaign 1, industrial-scale AI credential theft: targets included LLM gateways such as One API, New API, Veloera, Sub2API and LiteLLM, plus apps such as Dify, FastGPT, Langflow, RAGFlow, Open WebUI, LobeChat and Ollama, via unclaimed installs, anonymous admin endpoints, the LiteLLM default master key, CVE-2025-3248 (Langflow) and CVE-2026-28797 (RAGFlow)
  • •Keys were graded L1 (lead), L2 (confirmed working call) and L3 (quantified impact); keys public for more than 30 days were treated as low-value inventory, and stolen keys were fed into the framework's own model gateway to power more hunting
  • •Campaign 2, deepfake KYC bypass at two crypto exchanges: the best attempt finished the liveness movement sequence within 7 pixels of the target, yet the vendor's server-side verdict rejected every recorded attempt; a separate session built a real-time face-animation pipeline on one consumer GPU at 11.5 fps, with at least four agent sessions working in parallel
  • •Attribution is moderate confidence (prompt references to ARTEX tooling, simplified Chinese prompts, China time-zone settings); Amazon did not observe the activity live, cannot verify the agents' reported outcomes, notified potentially affected AWS customers, and published 11 IOC IP addresses
Read details→
E
Elon Musk@elonmusk·Collected 1h agoFresh · 6h
📉 Price Cut

X Debate: Musk Says Many of Nvidia's Critical Supply Deals Were Handshakes With Jensen, Not Written Contracts, and Some Will Be Lost Without Him; Quoting a Dylan Patel Clip on Google "Begging" Suppliers for Capacity, the Post Drew 57K Likes and About 3.8M Views

At 22:37 SGT on November 14, Elon Musk (@elonmusk) quoted a clip of SemiAnalysis founder Dylan Patel and wrote: "Jensen drove supply chain brilliantly at Nvidia, but many of those deals were a handshake with Jensen, not a written contract. Without Jensen, at least some of those critical deals will be lost." The quoted clip, posted by @CEOinterview, has Patel saying Jensen personally talked small suppliers with only a few hundred million dollars of revenue but an important subcomponent into letting Nvidia buy up their supply, and that with him gone, "Google's begging for more capacity from the whole supply chain." Musk's post has about 3.8M views, 56,967 likes, 5,374 reposts and 2,280 replies. This piece covers personal opinions and community discussion: Nvidia has not disclosed how such deals are structured, and neither the "handshake deals" claim nor the "Google begging for capacity" claim has been independently verified.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Musk's post: "many of those deals were a handshake with Jensen, not a written contract. Without Jensen, at least some of those critical deals will be lost," with about 56,967 likes, 5,374 reposts, 2,280 replies and roughly 3.8M views (post)
  • •The quoted clip is a roughly 91-second Dylan Patel interview excerpt posted by @CEOinterview (about 2,995 likes, roughly 3.1M views): Jensen "had complete foresight" and personally went to small subcomponent makers with only a few hundred million dollars in revenue to convince them to let Nvidia buy their supply (clip)
  • •In the same clip Patel says that with Jensen gone these suppliers are looking around the market, "Google's begging for more capacity from the whole supply chain," and questions whether Nvidia can keep its technology lead when it is only about a year ahead of its biggest competitors
  • •Confirmed background: Nvidia announced on November 12 that Jensen Huang resigned as CEO and director, CFO Colette Kress is interim CEO, and Q3 earnings are still set for November 17 US time; Nvidia has never disclosed how its supply deals are papered
  • •These are personal judgments: neither the handshake-deal claim nor the Google-capacity claim has official or independent confirmation; treat it as discussion, not fact
Read details→
D
Dwarkesh Patel@dwarkesh_sp·Collected 2h agoFresh · 6h
📊 Benchmark

X Debate: Dwarkesh Patel's Essay "The Avalanche That Hit Math Is Coming for AI Development" Says He Now Expects Superintelligence by 2030, Drawing 4,100+ Likes and About 820K Views

Podcast host Dwarkesh Patel published a long essay on November 13 subtitled "Why I now expect superintelligence by 2030." He writes that a few months ago he thought superintelligence was at least the better part of a decade away, and now thinks AIs as good as the best humans at AI research are only a couple of years, possibly a couple of months, away. His reasoning: AI has rapidly broken through verifiable domains like math, and AI research is itself largely verifiable. The post has about 820K views and 4,129 likes, quote posts from people like Dan Robinson spread the debate, and X lists it among trending stories. This piece covers one person's views and community discussion, not a verified forecast.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Dwarkesh's post: "The avalanche that hit math is coming for AI development," linking the essay and a narrated video; about 4,129 likes, 346 reposts, 138 replies and roughly 820K views (post)
  • •The core claim: AIs as good as the best humans at AI research are "only a couple of years away, and possibly only a couple of months away"; automating AI research would compress so much progress into one year that AIs at least as good as top experts in every field could arrive by 2030, plausibly as early as next year
  • •Evidence he cites from public sources: METR concluded after three months inside Anthropic that its progress rate on well-scoped tasks is 2x a year earlier; an OpenAI September blog post said its heaviest 10% of researchers went from about $1,000 to over $7,000 a day of internal coding agents; Anthropic said Claude "leads" more than 26% of its AI R&D work as of August
  • •Dan Robinson quoted it saying the footnote on compute bottlenecks "hit me like a sledgehammer" (about 2,461 likes); Dwarkesh followed up that even without a full singularity, the intelligence explosion might compress 4 years of progress into one
  • •Skepticism is part of the thread: one commenter on the essay said this is "not what I am seeing at all" in daily work, and another asked whether agent spend is a good proxy for progress; these are opinions, not established facts
Read details→
ADSponsored
F
Federal Reserve@federalreserve·Collected 3h agoFresh · 6h
📉 Price Cut

Fed Financial Stability Report: AI is the top-cited risk, named by 87% of contacts; AI computing debt issuance tops $680B as the Fed flags "circular financing"

On November 13 the Federal Reserve published its semiannual Financial Stability Report. Of 23 market contacts surveyed by the New York Fed in September and October, 87% cited AI as a risk to financial stability, up from 50% in the spring and the most of any risk. A box in the report says advanced computing debt issuance passed $680 billion by October, about five times all of 2023, and that leases, guarantees and equity stakes from hyperscalers and GPU makers create a "circular financing" dynamic.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •AI was the most-cited risk at 87% (50% in spring), ahead of a risk asset correction at 52%, higher long-term rates at 48%, and cyberattacks and fiscal debt sustainability at 43% each.
  • •Respondents named three AI concerns: stretched valuations and an earnings miss triggering a correction, cyber risk from state actors or frontier models themselves, and complex AI-related financing.
  • •Advanced computing debt issuance passed $680 billion by October (vs $130 billion in all of 2023), rising from under 6% to about 31% of nonfinancial investment-grade corporate issuance.
  • •Not-yet-commenced leases (over $1 trillion undiscounted) plus take-or-pay contracts and residual value guarantees (over $2 trillion) sit off balance sheets, so big tech exposure may be larger than it looks.
  • •The survey reflects respondents only; the report says it does not represent the views of the Fed Board or the New York Fed.
Read details→
E
Elon Musk@elonmusk·Collected 4h agoFresh · 6h
🛠️ Tooling

xAI reverses course: Grok API text watermarking is now off by default and opt-in per model, while voice API audio stays watermarked with AudioSeal and is locked on for EU and California users

xAI (signed as SpaceXSI in its docs) has rewritten the "Output Watermarking" page of its API docs: the invisible text watermark that was due to turn on by default on November 7 is now documented as off by default, and team admins can turn it on per model in the Console for grok-4.7, 4.6, 4.5, 4.3, and the three grok-4.20 variants. The page also says the text watermark uses Google DeepMind's SynthID Text. Audio from the voice APIs (Text to Speech, Speech to Speech, custom voices) is watermarked with AudioSeal by default and can be opted out per model, but stays watermarked when the end user is in the EU, the EEA, or California. On November 14, Elon Musk posted on X that text watermarking with Grok is only on where required by law or requested by the user.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Text: off by default; team admins turn it on per model under Team settings → Model output watermarking in the Console, effective within 5 minutes and logged in the audit log (xAI docs)
  • •Technique: the text watermark uses SynthID Text, published by Google DeepMind in Nature in 2024; it slightly shapes token choice and inserts no characters; the detection API is by application
  • •Audio: Text to Speech, Speech to Speech, and custom voices are watermarked with AudioSeal by default and can be opted out per model, but stay watermarked when the request IP puts the user in the EU, the EEA, or California
  • •A single request can force a watermark with the x-watermark: true header (watermark=true on WebSocket URLs); the x-watermark response header shows whether a response was watermarked
  • •Musk said on X that Grok text watermarking is only on where required by law or requested by the user; xAI has not published the exact date of the change
Read details→
J
Jacob Coxon@hilbertspaess·Collected 5h agoFresh · 6h
📊 Benchmark

X Debate: Former Anthropic Researcher Jacob Coxon Says a Log-Scale "Pretraining Compute Efficiency" Slide From the IPO Roadshow Was a Big Factor in His Leaving, Drawing 5,200 Likes and About 1.19M Views

At 03:56 Singapore time on November 14, former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon (@hilbertspaess) posted a slide from Anthropic's IPO roadshow on X and said it was a big factor in his decision to leave. His reading: the slide shows pretraining compute efficiency over time on a log-scale y-axis, and the curve is still bending upward, which he calls continued superexponential algorithmic progress, with Mythos just one point on that curve. At the time of writing the post has about 1.19M views, 5,212 likes and 321 replies, and X lists the controversy among its trending stories. Critics point out the chart has no axis labels or numbers. This piece covers one person's interpretation and community reactions, not an official Anthropic conclusion.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Coxon's post: "This slide from the Anthropic IPO roadshow was a big factor in my decision to leave," calling the y-axis a log scale and the progress superexponential; about 5,212 likes, 444 reposts and 321 replies (post)
  • •He argues Mythos was not a one-time jump but a point on a superexponential curve, and that Anthropic "could already retrain Mythos with a fraction of the compute originally needed"; he adds this does not strictly imply a software-only intelligence explosion, since R&D spending has also grown
  • •To critics who say the chart has no numbers or units, he replied that compute multipliers are unitless so relative distances still mean something, and that comparing the gain after Mythos with the gain before it needs only three data points (reply)
  • •He says he will not break his NDA to share absolute numbers, citing the trust between Anthropic and its employees, and in a follow-up he argued for pausing frontier development next year, saying it would only hurt OpenAI and Anthropic
  • •This is one person's reading: Anthropic has not publicly responded to Coxon's claims, and the slide's actual values have not been published
Read details→
T
Theo - t3.gg@theo·Collected 6h ago
🛠️ Tooling

X Debate: Theo Says "Software Will Get More Stable Overall Thanks to AI," Drawing 3,300 Likes and 365 Replies as Supporters Cite Cheaper Tests and Fuzzing While Skeptics Worry About Unreviewed Code Shipping

At 12:19 Singapore time on November 14, T3 founder and developer YouTuber Theo (@theo) posted on X: "Hot take: Software will get more stable overall thanks to AI." At the time of writing the post has about 109K views, 3,296 likes, 365 replies and 62 quotes, and X lists the debate among its trending stories. Supporters say AI makes writing tests, reading legacy code, tracing changes and fuzzing much cheaper; skeptics worry that AI writes code far faster than humans can review it, so unread code ships and systems fail in stranger ways. This piece collects community opinions, not a proven conclusion.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •The post is one line: "Hot take: Software will get more stable overall thanks to AI," with about 3,296 likes, 365 replies and 62 quotes (post)
  • •For: @rae1101x says much of on-call work is figuring out what changed, so if AI speeds that up outages get shorter even when bugs still ship; @maceskridge says the low-hanging security issues will get patched, after a few years of pain
  • •Conditional yes: @Aly0xDev says AI ships more bugs per hour but also writes the tests nobody wrote, as long as review and CI stay strict; @rxrenan_ says it only holds where someone wrote down what correct means
  • •Against: @callitVer1 says units get more consistent but systems get bigger, less understood and fail in weirder ways; @0xAndyZhou asks who debugs code nobody actually read at 3am
  • •Example cited by @its_ronc: in 2024 Google used LLM-written fuzz targets in OSS-Fuzz and found 26 new vulnerabilities, including one in OpenSSL (Google Security Blog)
Read details→
ADSponsored
V
Vahab Mirrokni@mirrokni·Collected 7h ago
🛠️ Tooling

Google Research Shares Antigravity /teamwork Results: Courtade–Kumar Conjecture From 2013 Proved in Full With 50M Lines of Lean 4, Weil Conjectures Formalized Autonomously, and 10,000 Academics Offered Six Months Free

On November 13, Vahab Mirrokni, Google Fellow and VP at Google Research, shared new results from Antigravity's /teamwork multi-agent system on the Google Research blog and X. Researchers from Google, CUHK, USC and CMU used Gemini 4 Argon and other Gemini models to prove information theory's 2013 Courtade–Kumar conjecture in full generality and formalized it in 50 million lines of Lean 4. /teamwork-LEAP also produced a fully autonomous formalization of the Weil conjectures (about 1.8 million lines of Lean across 28,800 subagent runs). On the engineering side, the rest of the Zircon microkernel was rewritten into about 800,000 lines of safe Rust, and 17 JAXBench TPU kernels got a 4.09x geometric-mean speedup. /teamwork and /boost are available in Antigravity now, and 10,000 academic researchers can apply for six months of free access to the top usage tier.

Google Research Shares Antigravity /teamwork Results: Courtade–Kumar Conjecture From 2013 Proved in Full With 50M Lines of Lean 4, Weil Conjectures Formalized Autonomously, and 10,000 Academics Offered Six Months Free
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •The Courtade–Kumar conjecture (2013) was proved in full and formalized in 50 million lines of Lean 4; Gemini built most of the new analytical bounds and interval-arithmetic certificates, while human researchers proposed the key candidate function
  • •/teamwork-LEAP autonomously formalized the Weil conjectures in about 1.8 million lines of Lean over 28,800 subagent runs, and produced first formalizations of the 1927 Birkhoff conjecture and the 3D Bochner–Riesz conjecture
  • •Engineering results: the rest of Zircon rewritten into about 800,000 lines of safe Rust that pass all kernel unit tests; libgav1 rewritten into about 170,000 lines of Rust that run 20-30% faster than the original C++ and assembly; a 4.09x geometric-mean speedup across 17 JAXBench TPU kernels
  • •/teamwork and /boost are available in Antigravity now, with Hydrogen for everyone and Carbon/Argon for Enterprise and Ultra/paid users; 10,000 academics can apply for six months free; Deep Review gives two free calls per week
  • •These results are self-reported by Google; the blog says preprints and Lean 4 repos are public, and outside verification will take time
Read details→
G
Georgi Gerganov@ggerganov·Collected 9h ago
🛠️ Tooling

llama.cpp and ggml Ship v1.0.0: First Major Version in 3.5 Years Adopts Semantic Versioning, With Breaking C API Changes Now Forcing a Major Bump; Release Drops 35 Deprecated Functions and Adds FP8 KV Caches, a MoE Expert Cache and /v1/audio/speech

On November 13, ggml-org published llama.cpp v1.0.0 on GitHub and announced on the Hugging Face blog that both the llama.cpp and ggml libraries are now at v1.0.0. From here on, breaking changes to the public C API in ./include bump the major version, backward-compatible features, backends and model support bump the minor version, and pure fixes bump the patch version. The release removes 35 deprecated functions, promotes the NextN/speculative decoding API into llama.h, adds OCP FP8 KV caches and a MoE expert cache with a configurable CPU share, supports new architectures such as Kimi-K3.1-Pro, hardens llama-server against SSRF, CORS and DNS rebinding issues, and adds an OpenAI-compatible /v1/audio/speech endpoint. Creator Georgi Gerganovs release post has about 4,180 likes.

llama.cpp and ggml Ship v1.0.0: First Major Version in 3.5 Years Adopts Semantic Versioning, With Breaking C API Changes Now Forcing a Major Bump; Release Drops 35 Deprecated Functions and Adds FP8 KV Caches, a MoE Expert Cache and /v1/audio/speech
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Versioning rules: MAJOR = breaking change to the public C API in ./include; MINOR = backward-compatible feature, backend, model support or API addition; PATCH = fix with no API change
  • •Breaking changes: llama_set_warmup, 35 deprecated functions and --defrag-thold are gone, and llama_set_embd_state_src is renamed llama_set_ctx_state_src, so apps embedding libllama need code changes before upgrading
  • •New capabilities: FP8 KV caches (-ctk/-ctv f8_e4m3), a MoE expert cache (moe_cache_size, moe_cache_cpu_share) and loading external PLE shards via --shard/--ple
  • •llama-server is hardened against SSRF, CORS, DNS rebinding and MCP tool cancellation issues, gains an OpenAI-compatible /v1/audio/speech endpoint and a redesigned web UI (GitHub release)
  • •Distribution channels include Docker, Debian, Homebrew, conda-forge, MacPorts, Winget and XCFramework; the project supports more than 150 architecture variants
Read details→
G
Gavin Baker@GavinSBaker·Collected 12h ago
🛠️ Tooling

X Debate: Altimeter and Atreides Send a Joint Letter Urging NVIDIA's Board Not to Rush Replacing Jensen Huang and to Keep His Return on the Table, as Elon Musk Says He Will Sign a Petition to Reinstate Him and Gavin Baker Says About 20,000 Have Signed

At 08:34 Singapore time on November 14, Atreides Management managing partner and CIO Gavin Baker (@GavinSBaker) posted on X a letter that he and Altimeter Capital CEO Brad Gerstner sent to NVIDIA's board. Writing as shareholders, they ask the board to run a "slow, measured, and deliberate process" on NVIDIA's future leadership that leaves all options open, including Jensen Huang's return, and to avoid rushing to replace him before the facts are known; they add that Interim CEO Colette Kress and her team can lead capably in the meantime. The post has about 1.35M views, 9,580 likes and 1,160 reposts. Earlier, Elon Musk replied that "a petition is underway to reinstate Jensen and I'm signing it too," a reply with about 207K likes. Baker later said the petition had roughly 20,000 signatures, including about 2,000 NVIDIA employees (his own claim, not independently verified). There is pushback too: Tesla senior staff engineer Yun-Ta Tsai argued that employees who really want Huang back should resign to make the point. This is a community discussion; NVIDIA's board has not publicly responded to the letter or the petition.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Signed by Altimeter Capital CEO Brad Gerstner and Atreides Management managing partner and CIO Gavin Baker; Baker calls it a first for Atreides (post)
  • •The ask: a slow, deliberate process on future leadership that keeps Jensen Huang's return possible; if the board still decides against it once the facts are known, that is the board's prerogative
  • •Elon Musk replied on November 14 (04:51 Singapore time) that he would sign a petition to reinstate Huang; the reply has about 207K likes and 7.3M views (post)
  • •Baker says the petition has about 20,000 signatures, including about 2,000 NVIDIA employees, and that he backs reinstating Huang while an independent investigation runs; the counts are his claim
  • •Pushback: Tesla engineer Yun-Ta Tsai's post (about 17K likes) says employees should resign to make the point; NVIDIA has not responded, and the November 17 (US time) earnings call is the next thing to watch
Read details→
H
Harrison Chase@hwchase17·Collected 16h ago
🛠️ Tooling

LangChain Raises $300M Series C at a $3B Valuation Led by CapitalG, Betting on LangSmith to Run, Improve and Govern Agents, With New Features Due November 20

LangChain co-founder and CEO Harrison Chase announced on November 13, on the company blog and on X, that LangChain has raised a $300 million Series C at a $3 billion valuation. Existing investor CapitalG led the round, with new investors GIC and DFJ Growth and existing investors IVP and Sapphire Ventures, bringing total funding to $460 million. The money backs LangSmith, its framework-agnostic agent platform, which the company says more than 7,000 organizations use; new LangSmith capabilities will be shown at a release event on November 20.

⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •The numbers: a $300M Series C at a $3B valuation, bringing total funding to $460M (LangChain blog, Business Wire release)
  • •Investors: CapitalG led, with new investors GIC and DFJ Growth and existing investors IVP and Sapphire Ventures; Salesforce Ventures, Insight, MongoDB Ventures and others joined, and Sequoia and Benchmark doubled down
  • •LangSmith is pitched as a framework-agnostic platform with three pillars, Agent Runtime, Agent Improvement and Agent Governance, running in LangChain's cloud, self-hosted, or in a customer's own AWS, Azure or Google Cloud account
  • •Scale figures are company-reported: more than 7,000 organizations use LangSmith, and CapitalG says the open-source projects have passed 1 billion downloads and now see more than 350 million a month
  • •Next up: a special release event on Friday, November 20 (US time) with several new LangSmith capabilities; the features have not been disclosed in advance
Read details→
M
Microsoft AI@MicrosoftAI·Collected 17h ago
🚀 Release

Microsoft MAI-Transcribe-2 Goes GA in Foundry: One Speech Model for 60 Languages With Built-In Diarization, an Hour of Audio in About 10 Seconds, $0.10 per Hour Through 2026

Microsoft AI announced on November 12 that MAI-Transcribe-2, its in-house speech-to-text model, is generally available in Microsoft Foundry for production use at $0.10 per hour of audio, a limited-time price through the end of 2026. The model entered public preview on September 3 and covers 60 languages in one model, with built-in speaker diarization, word-level timestamps and keyword biasing. Microsoft says it transcribes an hour of audio in about ten seconds of inference and averages 3.4% word error rate on the top 25 FLEURS languages.

Microsoft MAI-Transcribe-2 Goes GA in Foundry: One Speech Model for 60 Languages With Built-In Diarization, an Hour of Audio in About 10 Seconds, $0.10 per Hour Through 2026
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •From preview to production: public preview on September 3, general availability in Microsoft Foundry on November 12 (Microsoft Learn docs)
  • •Price: $0.10 per hour of audio, which Microsoft labels a limited-time offer through December 31, 2026; check the official pricing page for later rates
  • •One model, 60 languages: automatic language identification, code-switching such as Hinglish and Spanglish, and accuracy held in noisy audio
  • •Built in rather than bolted on: speaker diarization, word-level timestamps, keyword biasing (phraseList) and clean or verbatim transcript styles
  • •Speed and accuracy are Microsoft-reported: about 10 seconds of inference per hour of audio, 10x faster than GPT-Transcribe, 7x faster than Scribe v2 and 5x faster than Gemini 3.5 Transcribe; 5.2% average WER across all 60 FLEURS languages
Read details→
J
Jakub Jurovych@jakubjurovych·Collected 18h ago
📊 Benchmark

Deepnote Releases the Agent Initiative Benchmark for Proactive Agents: GPT-6 Astra Leads 12 Frontier Models at 8.97, GPT-6.1 Sol Second at $0.11 per Task

Data notebook company Deepnote open-sourced Agent Initiative Benchmark v1.0. It drops an agent into the Slack of PageMantle, a synthetic company with six years of records across 11 services, and checks whether it investigates unprompted, decides whether to speak, and picks the right audience. Across 50 situations and 12 models, GPT-6 Astra scored 8.97, GPT-6.1 Sol 8.65 and Claude Fable 5.2 8.17.

Deepnote Releases the Agent Initiative Benchmark for Proactive Agents: GPT-6 Astra Leads 12 Frontier Models at 8.97, GPT-6.1 Sol Second at $0.11 per Task
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Top three: GPT-6 Astra 8.97, GPT-6.1 Sol 8.65, Claude Fable 5.2 8.17; Gemini 4 Argon (5.60) and Grok 4.7 (4.51) finish last (official results)
  • •Price does not track quality: Sol costs $0.11 per task versus $1.87 for Fable 5.2, and GPT-6 Luna ($0.007) and Claude Fable 5.1 ($3.02) are about 430x apart in price but only 1.1 points apart
  • •Models help well but stay quiet poorly: they spoke about 9 times in 10 when help was needed, but held back only about 6 in 10 when silence was right, and speaking out of turn cost about 1.8x as much
  • •The heaviest tool callers scored lowest: Gemini 4 Argon averaged 35 calls and Grok 4.7 36, and both failed to answer about half the tasks that needed help
  • •Code and tasks are Apache 2.0 and the PageMantle dataset is CC BY 4.0, published on GitHub and Hugging Face
Read details→
G
Google Antigravity@antigravity·Collected 20h ago
🛠️ Tooling

Google Antigravity rolls out Dynamic Workflows: /run-workflow has the agent write a Python script to orchestrate parallel and sequential subagents

Google Antigravity introduced Dynamic Workflows: type /run-workflow and the main agent writes a Python script that schedules subagents with parallel() and pipeline(), each returning a structured result checked against a JSON Schema. You approve the script before it runs and can save it for reuse. Available on Google AI Pro and Ultra in both the App and the CLI.

Google Antigravity rolls out Dynamic Workflows: /run-workflow has the agent write a Python script to orchestrate parallel and sequential subagents
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •New /run-workflow command: the agent writes a Python script that runs subagents concurrently with parallel() or one by one with pipeline() (docs)
  • •Each subagent works in its own conversation and returns a result through a finish tool validated against a JSON Schema, keeping file reads and test logs out of the main context
  • •You approve each script before it runs (presets like Turbo can allow it) and can save it to the project to rerun
  • •Available on Google AI Pro / Ultra in the Antigravity App and CLI; ships its own Python, or set ANTIGRAVITY_PYTHON to a 3.8+ interpreter
  • •The official X post had about 1.9k likes and 650+ bookmarks at write time
Read details→
C
ClickHouse@ClickHouseDB·Collected 20h ago
🛠️ Tooling

ClickHouse open-sources Loom: shared memory plus a live code index for coding agents, lifting code-QA score from 0.78 to 0.84

ClickHouse released Loom, an open-source (Apache-2.0) agent memory system that keeps memories, a code index and run logs in one ClickHouse database, links memories to code, and flags memories that may be stale when code changes. It supports MCP, an HTTP API and Python/TS SDKs, with Claude Code and Codex plugins. In ClickHouse tests, the mean code-QA score rose from 0.78 to 0.84.

ClickHouse open-sources Loom: shared memory plus a live code index for coding agents, lifting code-QA score from 0.78 to 0.84
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •Code QA (24 questions x 3 runs): mean score 0.78 to 0.84, average cost per question $0.212 to $0.17 (vendor figures, blog)
  • •File finding (36 questions x 10 runs): accuracy 91.4% to 96.4%
  • •LongMemEval-S, 100 questions: retrieved memories 94% vs full history in the prompt 90%, with about 90% fewer tokens; memory.ask scores 96.6% on the full 500 (vendor figures)
  • •Memory and code index share one database: renames are followed, rewritten code gets the memory flagged for review, nothing is rewritten automatically
  • •Apache-2.0, needs ClickHouse 26.5+ (26.8+ recommended), starts with a one-line Docker install script
Read details→
T
Thinking Machines@thinkymachines·Collected 22h ago
🛠️ Tooling

Thinking Machines Details End-to-End 4-Bit Training for Inkling 2 Small: NVFP4 Forward Passes in Expert Layers From Pretraining Through RL, 8% Faster Pretraining and 20% Faster RL, With the 594B Model Pretrained in 68 Hours

In a Connectionism blog post, Thinking Machines explains how Inkling 2 Small used a native 4-bit (NVFP4) forward pass from the first pretraining step through the final RL rollout, with MXFP8 backward passes using stochastic rounding and quantized communications. The lab calls it the largest model it knows of trained end-to-end with a native 4-bit forward pass, with an 8% wall-clock speedup in pretraining and 20% in RL over full MXFP8 training.

Thinking Machines Details End-to-End 4-Bit Training for Inkling 2 Small: NVFP4 Forward Passes in Expert Layers From Pretraining Through RL, 8% Faster Pretraining and 20% Faster RL, With the 594B Model Pretrained in 68 Hours
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •NVFP4 is used only for forward passes in the MoE expert layers; backward passes use MXFP8 with re-quantization and stochastic rounding to limit gradient bias
  • •The same numerics run from pretraining through SFT and RL, so the quantized checkpoint needs no calibration at the end of training
  • •Versus full MXFP8: 8% faster pretraining wall-clock and 20% faster RL; pretraining costs about 2% compute efficiency and RL shows no discernible reward difference
  • •Expert-parallel communication became the new bottleneck, so the team quantizes the combine step after a 32-dimensional random Hadamard transform into a block-scaled format
  • •The lab says a similar-size run took several weeks months ago; Inkling 2 Small was pretrained in 68 hours on GB300 NVL72 racks
Read details→
A
Artificial Analysis@ArtificialAnlys·Collected 23h ago
📊 Benchmark

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v2.1 Moves to FrontierCode 2.0 and Terminal-Bench 4.1: Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Opus 5.5 Tie for First at 58, Scores Drop 5 Points on Average

On November 14 Artificial Analysis released Coding Agent Index v2.1, swapping FrontierCode 1.1 for its implementation of Cognition's FrontierCode 2.0 (132 real-world tasks graded on whether a maintainer would merge the change), upgrading Terminal-Bench from 4.0 to 4.1 and keeping SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA. Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh and high, in Claude Code) and Claude Opus 5.5 (max) share the lead at 58. Because FrontierCode 2.0 is harder, scores fall 5 points on average; only Codex with GPT-6.1 Terra (max) held within 1 point of its prior score.

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v2.1 Moves to FrontierCode 2.0 and Terminal-Bench 4.1: Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Opus 5.5 Tie for First at 58, Scores Drop 5 Points on Average
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •v2.1 is made of FrontierCode-AA 2.0 (132 real-world coding tasks graded on whether a maintainer would merge the change), Terminal-Bench 4.1 (the same 66 tasks with updated verifiers for reliability and resistance to reward hacking) and SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA
  • •Tied for first at 58: Claude Code with Claude Fable 5.2 (58 at both xhigh and high), Claude Code with Claude Opus 5.5 (max), and Devin Fusion CLI (Opus 5.5 max + GPT-6 Luna High); next come Claude Sonnet 5.5 (max) at 56 and Antigravity CLI with Gemini 4 Carbon (high) at 55
  • •All 23 configurations tested on both versions score lower on FrontierCode-AA 2.0 than on v1.1, with the mean falling from 45% to 29%; Claude Code with Fable 5.2 leads at 49%. On Terminal-Bench 4.1 every score moves less than 3 points, and Kimi Code CLI with Kimi K3.1 Pro leads at 68%
  • •Cost varies about 30x: among configurations scoring 48+, Codex with GPT-6.1 Sol (max, 52) costs $1.51 per task and Claude Code with Fable 5.2 (max, 56) costs $44.22; Fable 5.2 costs $2.89, $7.51 and $15.47 at medium, high and xhigh
  • •Claude Code and Devin Fusion CLI fall back to another model after a safety refusal: a fallback model completed about 9% of attempts for Devin Fusion CLI and Opus 5.5 (max), 6% for Fable 5.2 (xhigh) and 5% for Sonnet 5.5
Read details→
A
Artificial Analysis@ArtificialAnlys·Collected 1d ago
📊 Benchmark

Artificial Analysis Controlled Voice Arena: Speechify Simba 3.5 Takes #1 at 1192 Elo, Statistically Level With HeyGen Voice at About a Fifth of the Price ($6.58 per 1M Characters)

On November 13 Artificial Analysis said Speechify's Simba 3.5 text to speech model is #1 in its Controlled Voice Arena, statistically level with HeyGen Voice. Every model on this board reads with the same 8 cloned voices (4 US, 4 UK) and users vote blind, so it compares models rather than showcase voices. The leaderboard lists Simba 3.5 at 1192±17 Elo from 1,783 samples, HeyGen Voice at 1190±13 and Qwen-Audio-3.1-TTS-Plus third at 1176; Simba 3.5 costs $6.58 per 1M characters on the API versus $30.00 for HeyGen Voice.

Artificial Analysis Controlled Voice Arena: Speechify Simba 3.5 Takes #1 at 1192 Elo, Statistically Level With HeyGen Voice at About a Fifth of the Price ($6.58 per 1M Characters)
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •The Controlled Voice Arena has every model use the same 8 cloned voices (4 US, 4 UK) with blind user votes, removing the bias of picking a flattering demo voice
  • •Simba 3.5 scores 1192±17 Elo (95% interval 1175-1209, 1,783 samples) with a rank range of 1-3; HeyGen Voice scores 1190±13 with a range of 1-2, so the two are statistically level
  • •Third to fifth: Qwen-Audio-3.1-TTS-Plus 1176, HeyGen Voice Turbo 1174, Qwen-Audio-3.1-TTS-Flash 1164; Eleven v4 Turbo (1156) and Eleven v4 (1155) are sixth and seventh
  • •Price per 1M characters on each creator's API: Simba 3.5 $6.58, HeyGen Voice $30.00, HeyGen Voice Turbo $4.00, Eleven v4 $80.00
  • •Speechify's previous Simba 3.2 sits at 1082 Elo in 14th on the same board; AA's post also puts Simba 3.5 fifth on the Provider Voice board, which uses each vendor's own voices
Read details→
A
Artificial Analysis@ArtificialAnlys·Collected 1d ago
📊 Benchmark

Artificial Analysis Launches the Diarization Index for Speech to Text: APIs Scored on Word Diarization Error Rate, NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Transcribe Leads at 3.3% Ahead of Voxtral Small Transcribe 3 at 7.5%

On November 13 Artificial Analysis published the Diarization Index, a benchmark for whether speech to text APIs attribute each word to the person who actually said it. It scores Word Diarization Error Rate (WDER), the share of words given to the wrong speaker or to no speaker, across 97 English conversations of two to eight people, averaging three speaker bands (2, 3-4 and 5-8) with equal weight. NVIDIA's open-weight Nemotron 3.5 Transcribe leads at 3.3%, ahead of Voxtral Small Transcribe 3 at 7.5%, the most accurate priced API; MAI-Transcribe-2 scores 8.8% and is one of the fastest.

Artificial Analysis Launches the Diarization Index for Speech to Text: APIs Scored on Word Diarization Error Rate, NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Transcribe Leads at 3.3% Ahead of Voxtral Small Transcribe 3 at 7.5%
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • •The new metric is WDER = (wrong-speaker words + missed words) / scored reference words, lower is better; AA says it ranks on WDER instead of DER because for APIs DER mostly scores word timestamps rather than who spoke
  • •The set has 97 conversations of about 2-9 minutes each, about 6.8 hours in total, mixing real and synthetic speech; most audio is proprietary and held out, plus about 126 minutes of public NOTSOFAR-1 meeting recordings
  • •APIs are called directly with diarization switched on and are not told how many people are talking, with each conversation sent whole; price includes any separate diarization charge
  • •Nemotron 3.5 Transcribe goes from 1.7% WDER with two speakers to 5.6% with five to eight; in the largest groups every other API gets more than 10% of words wrong
  • •Voxtral Small Transcribe 3 scores 7.5% at $4.00 per 1,000 minutes; MAI-Transcribe-2 scores 8.8% at $1.67 and transcribes 93.7 seconds of audio per second of waiting; Nemotron 3.5 Transcribe is open-weight and has no listed price
Read details→