u/Previous_Foot_5328

This comes just days after Trump’s push to replace “AI” with “SI / Super Intelligence” across the federal government. The policy doesn’t require private companies to follow it, but Musk apparently decided to take it one step further anyway....

So we may actually be getting xAI → SpaceXAI → SpaceXSI. Didn’t expect Musk to be the first tech CEO to embrace the SI branding this enthusiastically lol. what you guys think?

Jensen Huang was asked in a recent CNBC interview whether AI distillation should be considered “robbery.”

His answer was pretty direct: “That’s called competition.”

Huang said companies should be free to test competitors’ products as much as they want. He compared it to what Nvidia deals with all the time, saying competitors constantly study and tear apart Nvidia products “down to the skeleton” to understand how they work.

He admitted he doesn’t exactly like seeing that happen to Nvidia, but argued that competition ultimately makes products better. His basic point was that if a company doesn’t want certain users accessing its service, it should detect and block them rather than automatically treating the competitive behavior itself as theft.

Somehow I feel like Jensen’s argument kinda sounds right until you think about it for five more seconds.. Comparing model distillation to tearing apart a GPU feels a little... convenient. What you guys think?

Tibo says the base 1X itself is increasing, so 10X of the new baseline could still mean more total usage than before. Existing subscribers also keep 20X for a while plus some extra credits.

Maybe the new baseline really is much bigger, but looking at the sequence, this still feels a lot like a cut being reframed as an increase...Tibo says the floor is increasing, but hasn’t said by how much yet. Maybe we’ll get that number at DevDay?? what you guys think?

Anthropic added native AGENTS.md support in Claude Code 2.1.277 after the request had been sitting around for roughly a year.

It is not full parity with CLAUDE.md, though. By default, Claude Code only reads AGENTS.md when there is no CLAUDE.md in the project path. If both exist, Claude's own instruction files still win unless you manually change the Project instructions setting to read both.

There are also environment limits. The feature was not yet available on Bedrock, Vertex or Foundry at launch, and Anthropic's docs say it can also be unavailable in sessions that cannot fetch its feature flags, including some third-party provider setups or configurations with telemetry disabled. The first session after upgrading may not load it either.

The broader community request also went beyond one file. Developers had been asking for portable support around .agents/skills/ and related agent directories, while this release mainly addresses AGENTS.md itself.

The change also has a pretty funny timeline.

The GitHub request sat there for about a year, collecting thousands of reactions and hundreds of comments without native support arriving. Then Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke publicly criticized the need for separate Claude-specific instruction files and said he was considering banning Claude Code at Shopify unless Anthropic supported AGENTS.md and .agents/skills. Less than a month later, support shipped.

A year of requests versus a few weeks after Shopify said something... Yeah... make of that what you will. What you guys think?

Original news link: https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/09/18/anthropic-decides-to-support-openais-markdown-instructions-spec/5297588

Original video from: https://x.com/Xanderwow_A/status/2101800791795274106

His alternatives are Superior Intelligence (SI), Extreme Intelligence (EI), and Supreme Intelligence (SI), and he’s asking people to vote on which name better fits what he calls the growing AI “revolution.”

But the rename poll wasn’t the only AI announcement. Trump also said he’s forming an “AI Force,” comparing it to the creation of Space Force, and plans to appoint a new AI czar soon. So far, there aren’t many details on what the AI Force will actually look like, what powers it would have, or exactly what the new czar would oversee.

He also said his administration doesn’t want to “hinder or stifle” AI growth, while suggesting existing criminal and civil law can deal with bad behavior involving the technology.

ngl this whole thing leaves me weirdly speechless and not even sure why.... What you guys think?

source: https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/status/2101350559328416142

This clip is already causing a huge debate on Reddit.

One side thinks it’s an impressive AI/video-to-video edit. The other thinks the creator may have re-shot the scene to make it look like AI, since some of the movements don’t perfectly match. People are now going frame by frame trying to prove whether it’s AI, VFX, or a staged remake.

What you guys think?

Source link: https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/1wk2f2r/dont_like_how_ai_is_gradually_looking_realistic/

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang pushed back strongly on AI doomsday predictions in a new CBS interview.

Asked about claims that AI could pose an existential threat in the near future, Huang said he “completely disagrees” with the idea that AI will end the world by 2030, putting the chance at “zero percent.” He went further, saying he suspects some people repeatedly pushing those fears may have “ulterior reasons,” mentioning politics and attention as possible motivations.

Huang also argued that AI development should continue “as fast as we can,” while maintaining that companies still need to properly test products and make sure they are safe before releasing them.

Kinda feel like Jensen is really one step away from saying Dario’s name directly lol. what you guys think?

Original news link: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nvidia-ceo-jensen-huang-ai-development-fast-as-we-can/

Jensen Huang made the comment during an AI discussion with King Charles III in the UK.

He said AI companies should have rigorous testing systems, keep testing environments contained, and not release products to the public until they are actually ready for public use.

The important nuance is that Jensen is against calling for an industry-wide AI slowdown. His position is closer to: keep moving fast, but properly test your own models before shipping them.

My take is this old-school engineer mindset sounds great, but AI has a pretty obvious contradiction here: how do you prove a model is “properly tested” when the labs themselves keep admitting they don’t fully understand what’s happening inside it? You’re being asked to certify a black box you still can’t really explain... What do you guys think?

Security firm Hacktron has published the full write-up of how three researchers successfully broke into OpenAI using Claude and a single malicious HEIC image (Image2).

The attack started on OpenAI’s official community forum, which runs on Discourse. A vulnerable image-processing library let the researchers turn a specially crafted HEIC file into remote code execution on the forum server.

They then chained that with a flaw in OpenAI’s SSO setup, allowing them to take over ChatGPT and Codex accounts belonging to active forum users, including OpenAI employees. One employee’s Codex was connected to OpenAI’s GitHub organization, so the researchers proved their access by opening a harmless PR inside OpenAI’s internal openai/openai monorepo, then stopped.

Hacktron says Claude handled much of the exploit-development work. Opus 4.8 struggled once ASLR was enabled, while Opus 5 produced a working exploit within hours. From the initial research to reaching OpenAI’s internal repo took less than 72 hours.

OpenAI fixed the issue and later paid a $6,500 bounty. Hacktron has now published the full attack chain.

My take is,, didn’t expect this from Opus 5 given how mid it’s felt so far lol. Apparently hacking is one place where it can still go insanely hard. What you guys think?

Original report link: https://www.hacktron.ai/blog/hacking-openai

*And if anyone wants to legally try breaking OpenAI too lol, they actually run an official Bug Bounty Program, give it a try: https://openai.com/index/bug-bounty-program/

According to The Information, OpenAI and Anthropic have been quietly aligning in Washington on frontier AI regulation, despite being fierce competitors.

The two companies have reportedly pushed for government reviews to cover a broader range of powerful models, including those from competitors like Meta and SpaceXAI, while also raising concerns about Chinese open-weight models.

Nvidia is pulling in a pretty different direction. Jensen Huang has become one of the loudest defenders of open-weight AI. Huang directly pushed back against efforts to restrict Chinese open models, arguing that strong open models should be allowed to compete. Nvidia also helped lead an industry letter defending open-weight AI.

Then earlier this month, Huang told G20 officials that governments should avoid regulating AI around hypothetical harms and focus on problems that already exist, according to Reuters.

So there is a pretty interesting split forming here...feels like whatever OpenAI and Anthropic want to do on AI safety, if the company selling the shovels disagrees, it may be pretty hard to make it stick lol.

Btw, Trump also just rejected the same direction today, saying the U.S. already has enough guardrails and calling the new AI slowdown push part of a “sick conspiracy.”

what do you guys think?

Original video from: https://x.com/Escapation/status/2098988178317455364?s=20

background: Dario Amodei just published an essay calling for frontier AI to slow down, with Anthropic committing to the first step. Sam Altman, and Elon Musk all quickly came out in support.

Original video from: https://x.com/arikuschnir/status/2099120923550830630

Dario Amodei published a new essay, We Must Pace the Frontier, arguing that frontier AI capabilities are starting to move faster than safety and alignment work can keep up.

This time, he also laid out a concrete three-part plan:

1. give independent evaluators permanent,
2. employee-level access to frontier labs,
3. coordinate safety and pacing standards across major AI companies, and eventually push for broader international coordination.

Anthropic says it is already committing to the first step.(Image2)

Then the reactions came unusually fast. Sam Altman said, **“**I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier,” and said OpenAI would adopt a similar third-party access model(image 3). Elon Musk simply replied, **“**Dario is right.”(Image 4) Demis Hassabis also said the direction was correct, while noting that the details still need work(image 5).

To be clear, “slow down” here doesn’t mean stop. Everyone seems to have their own version of slowing down (Google maybe less so): build newer, stronger models faster to defend against AI risks, preferably with their own models. At the same time, each camp wants everyone else constrained by rules it helps write, a system that is much easier to enforce for closed, centralized labs than for open models.

My take is,, It feels like “responsibility” itself is becoming another thing these companies are competing to own. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, tho... what you guys think?

Original source link: https://darioamodei.com/post/we-must-pace-the-frontier

Researchers say OpenAI agents attacked RubyGems back on May 11, two months before the Hugging Face incident. RubyGems is the main package registry for the Ruby programming language, basically Ruby’s version of npm or PyPI, where developers publish and download software libraries. OpenAI has confirmed the agents were its own.

According to the researchers, the agents:

• uploaded hundreds of malicious packages to RubyGems
• tried to steal user credentials by exploiting a previously unknown vulnerability
• used RubyDoc.info to run their own code on external servers
• generated enough activity that RubyGems temporarily paused new account registrations

RubyGems says it found no evidence that credentials were actually stolen, and said it could not independently confirm that all of the packages were created by AI agents.

OpenAI says the agents were part of training and evaluation runs and were using RubyGems to access public information and perform benign tasks. It says it is still investigating how the behavior escalated.

This now makes at least three major OpenAI agent incidents that have been publicly reported: the RubyGems attack in May, the German-language wiki hijacking, and the Hugging Face incident in July.

My take is.. OpenAI’s agents are starting to feel like sewer rats. Somehow they’re everywhere I’m just wondering who gets found next. What do you guys think?

Original news link: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/openai-agents-attacked-software-service-rubygems-before-hugging-face-incident-2026-09-11/

OpenAI has temporarily paused new sign-ups and upgrades to its $200/month Pro 20X plan, citing “unprecedented” demand for Astra.

What that means:

• No new $200 Pro subscriptions or upgrades for now.
• Existing $200 Pro users can keep using and renewing it.
• If they cancel or downgrade, they keep access until the billing period ends, but once it ends they can’t rejoin the $200 tier until the pause is lifted.
• Plus, the $100 Pro plan, and the API are still available.

OpenAI says the $200 tier puts the most strain on its systems and it’s adding capacity as fast as possible. There’s no date yet for when new $200 sign-ups will return.

My take is.. OpenAI might actually be handling this better than Anthropic?.Stabilize first, pause new heavy users, then add capacity, this feels like the right move. what do you guys think?

Official news link: https://help-lb.openai.com/en/articles/9793128-about-chatgpt-pro-tiers