Our profession needs to reinvent our ways of working. Most of software engineering craft - sprint planning, stand ups, backlogs, rfcs, code reviews - was made for a time where the cost of rework was huge, and high risk. We always needed to slow down to speed up. We simply don't live in that era anymore.

This. She’s clearly one of the very best operators in town.

I swear Keir Starmer was Claude Whelan from Slow Horses in another life…

white pill for my nerds: 60fps e-ink display a random guy outperformed entire eng teams by developing a pixel by pixel driver for e-ink displays that makes it 60fps. he did that after work for months, launched it yesterday. the future is bright

I built ponytail, the senior dev who closes your PR with "no," reopens it himself, and somehow solves everything in a seventh of the lines. don't ask. no skill: 3,629 lines caveman: 1,440 ponytail: 490 same model, same tests, same pass rate. github.com/DietrichGebert/po…

This is a *way* bigger deal than it seems... Frontier AI companies will *never* own the frontier again I kid you not... I've been waiting for someone to show this result for like 4 years... this is a huge deal. The short reason: combinations of models will *always* outperform individual models The long reason: this is the gateway to a million times more data... and huge leaps in compute efficiency. The AI scaling laws always win. More in article below 👇

Marco Rubio finding out he has to be the CEO of Anthropic after it gets nationalized

I’ve had a number of conversations with folks inside and outside government about the current situation with Anthropic, and here is what I believe to be true: — As we know, Anthropic publicly released its Mythos class models earlier this week under the commercial name Fable. — Fable is Mythos with guardrails. But if those guardrails fail, then you’ve exposed Mythos and its advanced cyber capabilities to people who shouldn’t have them. (Keep in mind that Anthropic itself widely promoted the idea that Mythos was a cyberweapon and needed to be regulated as such. They asked for government regulation of Mythos and championed the guardrails on Fable. If there is a vulnerability — big or small — it is Anthropic’s responsibility to patch.) — A highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails. The Admin asked Dario to fix the jailbreak or de-deploy the model. Dario refused. — In their blog post, Anthropic defended its decision by saying the jailbreak isn’t serious. That is not what the trusted partner and the USG believe; nor is that kind of minimizing language consistent with Anthropic’s brand as the AI safety company. It’s difficult to fathom how they could claim a jailbreak allowing operability of a cyber weapon could be defined as not “serious.” — In the past, Anthropic has always said that safety must be top priority and taken super seriously. In this case, Anthropic prioritized the continued offering of the consumer model over safety. — In reaction, the Admin issued the export control. The Admin did this reluctantly. It’s been very surprised that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to cooperate with a reasonable safety request (ie fixing the jailbreak issue). Anthropic’s reaction is very much at odds with their branding and ethos as a safe AI research community. — The Admin’s hope now is that Anthropic remediates the safety issue, the export control is lifted, and Fable goes back into general release. The Admin wants all of this to happen as soon as possible. It is frankly bewildered that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to comply with safety requests that it previously said were its highest priority. — Those trying to misdirect and tie this action to the prior DoW/Anthropic issues are wrong. The Admin values Anthropic’s technical capabilities and feels that this issue, while serious, should be easily resolved. The ball is in Anthropic’s court.

This is really big news. Google introduced the Open Knowledge Format (OKF) - a standardized way to store information in a directory of markdown files. Makes it really easy to make a digital brain that agents can use. These files can serve as a living wiki. You can give agents the ability to query them or edit them. They can interlink. Seems to me this could replace Notion or Obsidian. I can think of so many uses for this. Google's blog post: cloud.google.com/blog/produc… An easier to understand explanation is the SPEC.md file: github.com/GoogleCloudPlatfo… I gave those two links to Antigravity and asked how we could use it for any of the projects we're working on. It came up with so many ideas. I would imagine Claude Fable 5 would whip up some pretty amazing things based on this system. Currently creating an OKF library of our pepper garden. It's going to be a fun weekend.

We've reset 5-hour and weekly rate limits for all users.

Someone in the Trump admin has clearly read The Cobra, or Frederick Forsyth’s death was faked last year so he could advise the whitehouse.

A short history of how we got here, because the chronology is the whole story. January: the Pentagon demands unrestricted use of Claude for autonomous weapons and domestic surveillance. Anthropic says no. February: the President orders every federal agency to drop Anthropic. The Defense Secretary bans Pentagon contractors from doing business with them. A rival announces its classified-network deal within hours. March: the Pentagon designates an American company a "supply chain risk" under a statute written for foreign adversaries. A federal judge blocks it. May: the Pentagon signs AI deals with seven companies. Anthropic is not one of them. June 9: Anthropic releases Fable 5. June 12: Commerce issues an export control directive over a jailbreak that, by the government's own account, was demonstrated verbally, came with no written explanation, and involves a capability you can get from other publicly available models today. Two things are true at once. First: Anthropic spent months marketing Mythos as too dangerous to release. Sam Altman said it was "incredible marketing to say we have built a bomb." The Commerce Department has now formally agreed it is a bomb. If you describe your product as a munition in every press release, eventually a government takes you at your word. They wrote the legal predicate themselves and called it a brand. Second: we have run this experiment before. In the 90s the government classified encryption as a munition under ITAR. Activists defeated it by printing PGP's source code as a book, because books are protected speech and floppy disks were arms exports. A t-shirt with three lines of RSA Perl was legally a munition. The controls collapsed because math does not stop at customs. The new wrinkle is the "deemed export" rule: showing controlled technology to a foreign national inside the US counts as exporting it abroad. Which is why Anthropic's own foreign-national employees are now locked out of the model they built. The munition is in the building and the people who made it are not allowed to look at it. The jailbreak is the paperwork. The refusal was in January.

This is a pretty wild development. Like using Blowfish encryption in the 90s/2000s, the streisand-effect itself may lead to higher usage via VPNs etc.

Fable 5 is doing something wild on our FrogsGame post-training task. It trains a weaker model to solve the puzzle, peaks at 68%, and produces the only ~10x improvement we see across the benchmark. It spent 17 hours, 25M tokens without human in sight. 34% pass@1, while every other frontier model averages under 4%. We will publish a more detailed analysis soon.

The sheer cost of Fable makes even an AI optimist like me fear for the future of humanity. Not because its so great, but because you'll only experience its power if you give a small island nations GDP to Anthropic every month. Everyone else will live in Sonnet hell for the next 10 years.

"You only want to use safe AI guys. Lucky for you, i know someone..."

Australia being the legal testing ground for the US and UK's policies on free speech and copyright law is getting a little tiring.

Pope Leo XIV just held mass at La Sagrada Familia to honor 100th anniversary of Gaudi’s death. They lit up the cross at peak of the Basilica’s Tower of Jesus Christ for the first time and did a light show with a drone visual of Gaudi’s face. Next level.

NEW: malware developers added nuclear & biological weapons text to to their spyware. Goal? To trigger LLM safety refusals... so that their spyware wouldn't be analyzed by an AI security scanner. Cleanest practical example I can think of for why over-indexing on first order safety alignment is risky. When closed (and open) models ship with aggressive refusals, they will be sprinkled with second-order blindspots that attackers will discover...and exploit. We are only in the earliest days of attackers leveraging these features, and it wouldn't surprise me if users systems that need to handle complex cybersecurity issues demand that models be less safety-blunted. In the weeds: @SocketSecurity's post also shows why intention matters in how you design a malware analysis pipeline to avoid prompt manipulation. H/T to colleagues that shared this with me socket.dev/blog/mini-shai-hu…

Anthropic and OpenAI are both telling engineers to write loops. Not prompts. Not agents. Loops. That is not a coincidence. When the two most important AI labs on the planet independently converge on the same pattern — that is a signal worth paying attention to. Most engineers are still thinking in terms of single calls. Input → model → output. The engineers winning in 2026 think in cycles. Output becomes input. The model evaluates its own work. The loop runs until the result is right. This is the complete breakdown of what loops are, why they matter, and how to build them ↓

Fable is a good model. As with all new models, it is simultaneously excellent and entirely unremarkable (relative to other models). It is slow and expensive, and the "loops are all you need" discourse they are pushing is obvious in the context of someone using Fable-class models What I've found so far is that for broad scope design (code architecture) tasks, Fable is unremarkable. Or, not better enough to justify its cost and speed. But in highly targeted goal-oriented loops, it is another beast entirely. It is very slow but produces very good results. I let it churn on optimizing a SwiftUI-layout resolver in Go I wrote and it was able to bring it down to an order of magnitude I could not reach myself (micro => nanosecond scale). But it took 2 hours and $40 to do it and I had to claw back some changes it overfit to Apple Silicon. Still, very worth it. In comparison, for "implement this feature/change" iterative work, I ran head-to-head Fable vs GPT5.5 vs. GLM-5.1. They all produced equally acceptable final results, but GPT5/GLM did it in a couple minutes and Fable was churning away for 40 minutes. And GLM cost me less than a dollar, GPT5.5 ~$1.50, and Fable cost $9. You can see that in this context, interactively working with an agent is nonsense. Its too slow. You need to write loops to keep the agent working and you probably want to highly parallelize the work being done. As with all things, I think a balance makes sense... My sense is that I'd reserve Fable for targeted, surgical analysis and work. Not for daily driving everyday tasks. I'm going to keep spending a shitload of money (relatively) and maining Fable for the rest of the week to continue to judge, will report if anything changes. I'll continue to head-to-head as well.