AI Coding Live News

X Discussion: Grok Bot Engineer poteto Calls Adversarial Agent Code Reviews "Mostly a Waste of Tokens" and Argues for Empirical Plus Formal Verification Instead

On November 3, @poteto (lauren), whose bio says she works on Grok @bot at SpaceXSI, is on the React Compiler core team, and previously worked at Cursor, Meta and Netflix, posted what she called "maybe a hot take": she now considers adversarial reviews mostly a waste of tokens and thinks those tokens are far better spent on empirical combined with formal verification. She says she has updated her agent skill pack pstack to use its interrogate (multi-model adversarial review) skill less and may eventually remove it. She adds that she has found very little value in code review in the abstract, because agents tend to get lost in nitpicks and YAGNIs. The post drew about 906K views, 9,227 likes and 5,538 bookmarks. It is a personal opinion that sparked debate over the value of AI code review.

Key Takeaways

  • Opinion (personal, not an official finding): adversarial reviews are "mostly a waste of tokens"; empirical plus formal verification is the better use of them
  • Action: the author says she has made pstack use the interrogate skill less and may remove it; at fetch time the public pstack folder in GitHub cursor/plugins had no commits after October 27, so the change is not visible there yet
  • What interrogate is: per its public SKILL.md, it spawns one read-only reviewer per configured model (defaults Claude Opus 5.5 xhigh and Grok 4.7 xhigh fast) to attack the diff, then sorts findings into Act on, Consider, Noted and Dismissed without auto-applying fixes
  • Author (per her X and GitHub bios): engineer on Grok Bot at SpaceXSI, React Compiler core team, previously at Cursor, Meta and Netflix
  • Reach: about 906K views, 9,227 likes, 5,538 bookmarks, 668 replies, 356 reposts and 210 quotes
Read full story

Anthropic Open-Sources FlashProve: zkSNARK Proofs That a Reply Came From the Committed Model, About 110 Tokens/s for 400B Llama 4 Maverick on One H100

Anthropic's Frontier Red Team published a research post on November 2 and open-sourced FlashProve under Apache 2.0. A model provider commits to hidden weights once, then attaches a zero-knowledge proof to each reply, so a user without the weights can check on an ordinary CPU that the reply really came from that model. That targets routing services that quietly swap in cheaper models and tampered token streams. Anthropic reports about 110 tokens/s on one H100 for Llama 4 Maverick (400B MoE, 4-bit), proofs of about 19 MB per 1,024-token request, and roughly 70-95x the GPU time of vLLM inference. It is an unmaintained research prototype limited to 1,024-token contexts and greedy decoding of an integer version of the model. Anthropic engineer Steve Weis shared the release on X.

Anthropic Open-Sources FlashProve: zkSNARK Proofs That a Reply Came From the Committed Model, About 110 Tokens/s for 400B Llama 4 Maverick on One H100

Key Takeaways

  • Anthropic-reported: on Llama 4 Maverick (400B MoE, 4-bit) one H100 proves about 110 tokens/s (prefill, 24 requests per batch), with proofs of about 19 MB per 1,024-token request.
  • It is costly: roughly 70-95x the GPU time of vLLM inference; the performance page lists about 270 GB of host memory for serving and about 39 minutes to commit to a set of weights.
  • Verification needs no GPU: the C++ verifier checks a proof in about 21 seconds on one thread, and a slower Lean verifier plus Lean 4 proofs of the security theorem are included.
  • Against prior work: VerInf proved the same model at about 0.02 tokens/s; the commercial Attestable reached 53-77 tokens/s on Gemma 4 31B but has no open-source release.
  • Limits: v0.16.0 is an unmaintained research prototype with 1,024-token contexts, greedy decoding of an integer model only, and no architecture hiding.
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

X Discussion: levelsio Used Claude Code to Decompile the Battlefield 1942 Demo and Put It in the Browser With Multiplayer, Citing About 1M Output Tokens

Indie developer Pieter Levels (@levelsio) said on X on November 2 that he used Claude Code to decompile the engine of the free Battlefield 1942 demo, port it to C, compile it to WebAssembly and host it at bf1942.pieter.com, where it runs in the browser with online co-op on the Tobruk map. He said the job took about 1 million output tokens, roughly $100 at API prices, while he pays for a $100-a-month Claude subscription. His two main posts drew about 2,200 likes and 340,000 views and reached X trending. These are the author's own claims and community discussion, not independently verified.

X Discussion: levelsio Used Claude Code to Decompile the Battlefield 1942 Demo and Put It in the Browser With Multiplayer, Citing About 1M Output Tokens

Key Takeaways

  • Author's account: Claude Code decompiled the Battlefield 1942 demo engine, which was ported to C and compiled to WebAssembly to run in the browser.
  • The live build at bf1942.pieter.com opens directly, is labeled non-commercial and unofficial, and offers online co-op on Tobruk with no install.
  • Cost: about 1 million output tokens by the author's count, roughly $100 at API prices; he actually pays for a $100-a-month Claude subscription.
  • He said it was much harder than his earlier Quake and DOOM ports, whose engine source code id Software released long ago.
  • Reach: the first post had about 1,100 likes and 230,000 views, the launch post about 1,100 likes and 107,000 views; testers are already reporting bugs.
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

X Discussion: Former Claude Code Member Thariq Says the $200 Plans Are Enough and "This Is the Most Expensive Intelligence Will Ever Be"

Thariq (@trq212), whose X bio reads "formerly Claude Code @anthropicai", posted on November 2: "one week in my takeaway is that you don't need unlimited tokens to do great work, the $200 plans are amazing and this is the most expensive intelligence will ever be." Within about seven hours the post drew more than 5,500 likes, 240,000 views and 350+ replies. Supporters say flat-rate plans are enough for most developers; critics point out the tension between "no unlimited tokens" and recommending the top tier, and some worry prices will rise once subsidies end. This is a personal view, not an Anthropic statement.

Key Takeaways

  • Thariq's exact claim: you don't need unlimited tokens to do great work, the $200 plans are "amazing", and "this is the most expensive intelligence will ever be."
  • In replies he added that he has been using the plans on weekends for a while and has "never hit a real limit."
  • Claude's official pricing page lists Max at $100/month (5x Pro usage) and Ultra at $200/month (10x Pro usage, no 5-hour limit, $200/month in API credits).
  • Pushback centers on two points: the tension between "no unlimited tokens" and recommending the most expensive tier, and whether current prices depend on subsidies that may end.
  • This is a personal view from a former Anthropic team member, not an official Anthropic position, and it comes with no usage data.
Read full story
ADSponsored

X Discussion: Jason Calacanis Says Under $40K a Year in AI Subscriptions Delivers $2M+ in Value and Has Automated at Least Seven Full-Time Jobs

Angel investor and This Week in Startups host Jason Calacanis posted on X on November 2 that he spends under $40K a year on tokens and subscriptions from Anthropic, Lovable, Grok Bot, ElevenLabs and other AI products, yet gets more than $2M in value at LAUNCH and This Week in Startups. He said they have automated at least seven full-time jobs and become 100% faster at the average task, and that the last 90 days changed more than the previous two years. Within about 9 hours the post drew about 2,200 likes and 230K views, with debate centered on AI ROI and job replacement. All figures are his own claims and have not been independently verified.

Key Takeaways

  • This is Calacanis's personal post, not official data or an announcement from any AI company; the $40K, $2M, seven jobs and 100% faster figures are self-reported with no public breakdown.
  • The original post (2026-11-02 05:27 UTC) had about 2,201 likes, 106 reposts, 244 replies, 42 quotes, 230K views and 715 bookmarks at fetch time.
  • Tools he named include Anthropic, Lovable, Grok Bot and ElevenLabs plus a long tail of other products; he also said anyone who has not used the last 90 days of products for at least 30 hours a week has no idea how profound this software is.
  • Supporters: entrepreneur Steven Cohn (@spcohn) quoted it saying his team has seen the same level of ROI; Farzad (@farzyness), with about 400K followers, quoted it saying "The ROI for AI is mind-boggling," drawing about 157 likes.
  • Skeptics: one user mocked posting "we automated seven full-time jobs" with a siren emoji like a product launch, noting that 30 hours a week of usage is itself like a new full-time job.
Read full story

Meituan ships LongCat-2.5, a 1.6T-parameter (about 48B active) native multimodal agentic model, with API pricing of $0.30/$1.20 per 1M tokens

On Nov 2 Meituan's LongCat team listed LongCat-2.5 in its API platform change log as the full release of September 25's LongCat-2.5-Preview. The official technical blog says it has 1.6 trillion total parameters with about 48 billion activated per token, builds on LongCat-2.0 with stronger native visual understanding and agentic coding, and was trained and served with W4A4 inference on domestic AI accelerators. Vendor-reported scores include 88.4 on Terminal Bench v2.1, 38.5 on Terminal Bench v4.0, 91.9 on BrowseComp and 83.1 on MCP Atlas. The API speaks both OpenAI and Anthropic formats with a 1M-token context and up to 128K output tokens, at a limited-time price of $0.30 per 1M uncached input tokens, $0.006 cached input and $1.20 output.

Meituan ships LongCat-2.5, a 1.6T-parameter (about 48B active) native multimodal agentic model, with API pricing of $0.30/$1.20 per 1M tokens

Key Takeaways

  • Scale: a 1.6-trillion-parameter MoE with about 48B active per token, a 1M-token context and up to 128K output tokens (official blog, API docs)
  • Code agents (vendor-reported): Terminal Bench v2.1 88.4 (Claude Opus 5 89.1, GPT-5.6-Sol 88.8), Terminal Bench v4.0 38.5 (GPT-5.6-Sol 37.3, Claude Opus 5 53.9), DeepSWE v1.1 64.6
  • General agents (vendor-reported): BrowseComp 91.9, MCP Atlas 83.1, AutomationBench v1.0.6 51.8, HLE with tools 63.1; AutomationBench jumps from 15.8 on LongCat-2.0
  • Pricing: limited-time $0.30 per 1M uncached input tokens, $0.006 cached input and $1.20 output (pricing page)
  • Engineering: W4A4 inference raises prefill throughput 43.3% and decode throughput 42.77% over a W8A8 baseline; FSDP gives 86% higher per-device throughput than DDP in long-sequence SFT
Read full story

SenseTime open-sources SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview, a 9B looped Transformer with about 14.6B inference parameters for long-context and agentic work

On Oct 30, SenseTime released SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview (Apache 2.0) on its official X account and Hugging Face. It runs layers 4 to 27 of a 32-layer decoder twice with the same weights, so each forward pass executes 56 layer computations while storing about 9B parameters, about 14.6B at inference, and it uses two-stream mHC (manifold-constrained hyper-connections) to manage the residual streams. It takes text and images, with training sequences up to 262,144 tokens. SenseTime charts show it beating Qwen3.5 and Qwen3.6 peers on BIRD-Dev, WorkBuddy Bench, and other agent and data tasks, while it still trails on Terminal Bench 2.1; the technical report is not out yet. The official launch post drew about 910 likes.

SenseTime open-sources SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview, a 9B looped Transformer with about 14.6B inference parameters for long-context and agentic work

Key Takeaways

  • Structure: 32 distinct decoder layers, with layers 4 to 27 looped twice on shared weights for 56 layer computations per forward pass; about 9B stored and about 14.6B inference parameters (model card)
  • Vendor-reported scores: BIRD-Dev 71.38 (Qwen3.5-27B 69.84), WorkBuddy Bench 66.89 (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 61.98), AutomationBench 13.72 (Qwen3.5-27B 10.17)
  • Weak spots from the same vendor chart: Terminal Bench 2.1 at 40.45, below Qwen3.6-27B at 47.19; tau3-Banking at 18.56, slightly below Qwen3.5-27B at 19.59
  • Training context up to 262,144 tokens; hybrid attention uses three linear-attention layers plus one full-attention layer per four-layer group; MTP speedup is available, DSpark and DFlash2 are still training
  • Apache 2.0, requires trust_remote_code=True; official examples cover Transformers 5.18.0, a 4-GPU LightLLM setup, and an SGLang PR, and the technical report is still to come
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:
⚡ SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview⚡ Qwen3.5-27B⚡ Qwen3.6-35B-A3B🌐 SenseTime
O
OpenAIhelp.openai.com·
👀62
🔥83

OpenAI will pool ChatGPT and Codex into one token-based usage allowance starting in December for Plus, Pro, and Business; Instant chat is excluded

On Oct 31, OpenAI's Help Center added a page titled "Understanding ChatGPT and Codex usage limits": starting in December, the usage allowance on Plus, Pro, and Business plans will be shared across ChatGPT and Codex as OpenAI brings the agentic capabilities of Work into the main ChatGPT experience. Usage will be measured in tokens, so stronger models and more complex tasks use more; Instant chat will not draw from the allowance. Users will see combined remaining usage and reset times in Settings > Usage, and can wait for a reset, upgrade, or buy credits when they run out. OpenAI says it expects most users will not need to wait for resets more often than they do now, but it has not given an exact start date or per-plan allowances. The news drew strong concern from Plus users on X.

Key Takeaways

  • Timing: takes effect in December, exact date not announced; covers Plus, Pro, and Business plans (OpenAI Help Center)
  • Metering: everything is measured in tokens and Instant chat is excluded; the Business pricing page now also notes that plan usage will have a shared limit across ChatGPT and Codex starting in December (Business pricing)
  • Today's baseline: only Work and Codex share an allowance now; Plus is estimated at 5-45 local messages per 5 hours on GPT-6 Astra, 15-160 on GPT-6.1 Sol, and 350-3,000 on GPT-6 Luna (official estimates, help article)
  • Pro 100/200/500 currently have no 5-hour limit in Work and Codex; per-plan allowances after the merge have not been published
  • OpenAI's position: most users should not wait for resets more often than today; when out, wait, upgrade, or buy credits
Read full story
A
Anthropic (Claude Help Center)support.claude.com·
👀17
🔥82

Anthropic extends Claude text watermarking to older models including Mythos 5, Opus 4.7/4.6 and Sonnet 4.6, reportedly from November 3

Anthropics help center article "How Claude marks AI-generated content" (updated Oct 28) now lists older models released before Aug 2, 2026, including Claude Mythos 5, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, Opus 4.5, Sonnet 4.6 and Sonnet 4.5, as carrying text watermarks on first-party surfaces, and says Anthropic is adding watermarks to these models to meet EU AI Act Article 50 transparency duties. According to a customer email screenshot reported by outlets such as MACCUS, the legacy rollout starts Nov 3, with Amazon Bedrock possibly a few days later; Anthropics public pages do not state that date. The watermark follows Google DeepMinds SynthID-Text approach, adds no hidden characters or extra tokens, and detection is in private preview only for regulators, media, researchers and similarly obligated organizations, which has drawn complaints on X that users cannot check their own text.

Anthropic extends Claude text watermarking to older models including Mythos 5, Opus 4.7/4.6 and Sonnet 4.6, reportedly from November 3

Key Takeaways

  • Scope: in the official support table, older models such as Mythos 5, Opus 4.7/4.6/4.5 and Sonnet 4.6/4.5 are ticked only for first-party text watermarks; cloud-partner watermarks and C2PA file credentials remain limited to models launched after Aug 2 (see the help center)
  • Timing: a customer email reported by media puts the start at Nov 3, with Bedrock possibly a few days later (MACCUS); Anthropics public pages give no date
  • Cost and quality: Anthropic says the watermark adds no characters, no extra tokens and no extra cost, using a variant of SynthID-Text (see Anthropics explainer)
  • Detection: the detection API is in private preview for regulators, law enforcement, media, fact-checkers, researchers and obligated enterprises; ordinary users cannot check text yet
  • Reach: watermarks apply worldwide across Claude, the Claude Platform API, Claude Code, Cowork and Tag, because Anthropic says it has no durable way to scope them by region yet
Read full story

OpenAI rolls out GPT-6 Rosalind Research, a GPT-6 generation life sciences model for approved research orgs in Work, Codex and the API at $15/$75 per million tokens

In its October 30 ChatGPT Business release notes, OpenAI said GPT-6 Rosalind Research is rolling out to a limited set of customers with Research approval. It shows up in the model picker in ChatGPT Work and Codex, not in the Chat tab, and separately approved organizations can call it through the API as gpt-6-rosalind. OpenAI's token-based Enterprise rate card lists it at $15 per million input tokens, $1.50 cached input and $75 output, three times the price of GPT-5.5 Rosalind Research.

Key Takeaways

  • Approved orgs only: both the organization and the user need Rosalind Research approval, and Discovery approval does not include it
  • Where to use it: the model picker in ChatGPT Work and Codex, not the Chat tab; in Codex it pairs with the Life Sciences Research plugin
  • API model name gpt-6-rosalind needs separate approval and is limited to internal research tools, not customer-facing products
  • Priced at $15 input, $1.50 cached input and $75 output per million tokens, versus $5/$0.50/$25 for GPT-5.5 Rosalind Research
  • Enterprise workspaces start with a two-week Admin Preview that is off by default until an admin enables it for approved users
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:
⚡ GPT-6 Rosalind Research⚡ GPT-5.5 Rosalind Research⚡ GPT-6 Astra🤖 Codex🤖 ChatGPT Work🌐 OpenAI
ADSponsored

CrowdStrike: China-nexus VAPOR PANDA used the ARTEX multi-agent framework, mainly on DeepSeek, against 200+ organizations in 11 days

CrowdStrike reported on Oct 29 that the China-nexus espionage group VAPOR PANDA, starting Oct 17, ran the open-source agentic intrusion framework ARTEX with DeepSeek plus a second, unconfirmed commercial LLM, hitting more than 200 organizations in at least 14 countries from a single controller over 11 days. Post-exploitation was confirmed at nine organizations, where the BLOODALCHEMY backdoor was deployed. Planning agents used about 1.4 billion input tokens in a single intrusion, and recovered transcripts show a human operator steering the agents in Chinese at key decision points.

Key Takeaways

  • Over 11 days from Oct 17, one ARTEX controller targeted 200+ organizations in at least 14 countries, including several foreign ministries, 19 US pharma, semiconductor, defense, nuclear and finance organizations, and telecoms in the US, Belgium and the Philippines (CrowdStrike report)
  • Post-exploitation was confirmed at 9 organizations, which received the BLOODALCHEMY backdoor; at least 12 more saw password spraying and credential scanning
  • DeepSeek was the main model, plus a subscription commercial LLM CrowdStrike could not confirm; planning agents used about 1.4 billion input tokens in one intrusion
  • Recovered transcripts show an operator issuing Chinese instructions tagged as human instructions, including an order to find Windows hosts without the Falcon sensor
  • CrowdStrike says this is separate from the Storm-0940 ARTEX activity reported by Microsoft, and judges China-nexus groups will highly likely keep adopting such agent frameworks over the next 12 months
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

OpenAI Daybreak Red (GPT-5.6 Cyber) arrives on Amazon Bedrock in AWS GovCloud (US-East) for vetted defenders, at $16.875 input and $101.25 output per 1M tokens

On Oct 30, AWS announced that Daybreak Red (GPT-5.6 Cyber, model ID openai.gpt-5.6-cyber), the OpenAI security model built for vulnerability research, is now on Amazon Bedrock in AWS GovCloud (US-East), after previously being offered only in US East (Ohio). Access still requires passing OpenAI Daybreak eligibility. GovCloud short-context pricing is $16.875 input and $101.25 output per 1M tokens, about 23% above Ohio at $13.75 and $82.50.

Key Takeaways

  • Regions: Daybreak Red can now be called In-Region in us-east-2 (Ohio) and us-gov-east-1 (GovCloud US-East); Geo and Global cross-Region inference are not supported (AWS announcement)
  • Eligibility: customers must first enroll in OpenAI Daybreak / Trusted Access for Cyber, then have their AWS account team enable access
  • Pricing: GovCloud short context (272K input tokens or fewer) is $16.875 input, $21.09375 for 30-minute cache writes, $1.6875 cache reads and $101.25 output per 1M tokens
  • Data: AWS says inference data is not used for training and Daybreak Red data does not need to be shared with OpenAI; it runs on an inference engine with zero-operator access enforced at the chip
  • API: served through the bedrock-mantle endpoint with OpenAI Responses and Chat Completions, and a 1,050,000-token context window
Read full story

Anthropic details Claude self-assessment for misuse detection: 78% recall at 1% false positives for under 2% extra compute

On Oct 29 Anthropic introduced self-assessment on X: after each response, Claude produces a structured preliminary safety assessment of the whole conversation for offline review. Anthropic's Safeguards blog says that on Claude Fable 5, at a 1% false-positive rate, it flags 78% of the conversations a stronger prompted classifier flags and 94% of high-priority ones. Because the conversation is already in the KV cache, it adds about 10 output tokens on average and an estimated under 2% of inference compute. It has run in production since June, but Anthropic says it is not robust against an attacker who targets it directly and is only one layer of defense in depth.

Anthropic details Claude self-assessment for misuse detection: 78% recall at 1% false positives for under 2% extra compute

Key Takeaways

  • On Claude Fable 5, at a 1% false-positive rate it recalls 78% of what the prompted classifier flags and 94% of high-priority (7+) conversations (vendor figures, Safeguards blog)
  • It reuses the KV cache, adding about 10 output tokens per assessment on average; Anthropic estimates under 2% extra inference compute and does not bill customers for it
  • Across four model sizes, recall at 1% false positives rises from about 16% to about 96% and AUC from 0.862 to 0.995
  • As a real-time blocker it is weak: attack success on 24 cyber tasks only drops from 79% to 54%, versus 25% with a prompted classifier
  • In August it raised over 100k child sexual abuse flags from a single API customer, reported to NCMEC; about a third of flags fall outside the existing taxonomy
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

Claude Code lead Boris Cherny on faster usage drain: every shared session reviewed, no regression found, fixes for a few smaller issues rolling out

Since Oct 21 many developers on X have complained that Claude Code was draining usage limits much faster. On Oct 28 (UTC) Boris Cherny, who leads Claude Code at Anthropic, replied on X that the team reviewed every session ID users shared, found no single root cause and no regression in Claude Code, and is rolling out fixes for a few smaller issues that made some sessions burn tokens faster. Most fast-drain cases traced back to one or two heavy sessions using xhigh effort, /goal, Workflows, Agent Teams or long SDK jobs.

Key Takeaways

  • The complaint post that started it said usage was draining 5x faster and drew about 1,660 likes and 240+ replies (a user claim, not official data)
  • Boris Cherny: the team checked every shared session ID, found no single root cause or Claude Code regression, and is rolling out fixes for a few smaller issues
  • Heavy features were the main driver: xhigh effort, /goal, Workflows, Agent Teams and long SDK jobs
  • Subagents inherit the session effort level by default, which adds up fast; /usage shows where tokens went
  • The official docs say Agent Teams use about 7x more tokens than standard sessions when teammates run in plan mode
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:

Cartesia’s new H-Nets learn from raw bytes without a tokenizer, matching SmolLM3’s 11T-token result after about 1T tokens

On Oct 28 Cartesia chief scientist Albert Gu (co-author of Mamba) and team published two research posts on a new generation of hierarchical networks (H-Nets). In a controlled scaling ladder, swapping BPE tokenization for learned dynamic chunking alone gave up to 3-5x compute efficiency. A larger two-stage byte-level H-Net (3.67B parameters), compute-matched per byte against SmolLM3-3B, reached SmolLM3’s final average downstream score after about 1T tokens versus 11T (vendor-reported). The new architecture is not released yet; Cartesia says it plans to release it over time.

Cartesia’s new H-Nets learn from raw bytes without a tokenizer, matching SmolLM3’s 11T-token result after about 1T tokens

Key Takeaways

  • Controlled ladder (vendor-reported): a 1-stage H-Net as a drop-in replacement for BPE gave about 1.3x compute efficiency on validation loss, about 2x on code, and up to 3-5x overall
  • Larger run: a 3.67B two-stage byte H-Net vs 3.08B SmolLM3, compute-matched within 2% FLOPs per byte, matched SmolLM3’s six-task average after about 1T tokens instead of 11T
  • Code gains are larger: 1.49x-2.40x (median 2.04x) on 15 in-distribution languages, median 3.10x on 10 out-of-distribution languages, up to 5.37x on Prolog
  • Training mix is 70% English, 20% code, 5% math and 5% multilingual; the main network sees about one position per 7.6 bytes, and the outer encoder and decoder take about 43% of FLOPs
  • No weights or code yet; Cartesia says it will release some of these architectures over time; the original H-Net paper is arXiv 2507.07955
Read full story
Linked Models & Agents:
⚡ H-Net⚡ SmolLM3-3B⚡ Mamba-2🌐 Cartesia🌐 Hugging Face