Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
System card: https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/gpt-5-6-preview
AI人工智能最新资讯、模型发布、研究进展
System card: https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/gpt-5-6-preview
The White House asked OpenAI to delay the rollout of its GPT-5.6 AI models, two weeks after Anthropic had to take its most advanced AI models offline.
Article URL: https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/liva-ai/jobs/gvtc3Ep-founding-operations-lead Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48688961 Points: 0 # Comments: 0
Less than 24 hours after news broke that OpenAI would stagger its next model release at the request of the Trump administration, that model, GPT-5.6, is here. On Friday, the company unveiled the limited preview of its new GPT 5.6 model suite: Sol, the flagship; Terra, a medium-tier model for "high-volume work"; and Luna, a […]
Assa Abloy has laid off the majority of staff at Level Home, the smart lock company known for building smart tech into traditional-looking deadbolts, and is folding the business into Kwikset, according to a source familiar with the decision. The Verge obtained exclusive details from a person familiar with the restructuring who requested anonymity as […]
We built a model router that plugs into coding agents (e.g. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, etc.) and intelligently sends requests to the best model to serve them. Here's a quick demo of running it locally: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isKhAyivtfM . At Weave, we write most of our code with AI, and it's been getting more expensive. This came to a head when Opus 4.7 was released and, thanks to its tokenizer changes, our costs shot up. We knew we didn't need Opus for everything but we didn't want to
Vercel has released Eve, an open-source framework for building, deploying, and operating AI agents in production. The framework uses a filesystem-based project structure to organize agent instructions, tools, skills, subagents, communication channels, and scheduled tasks, enabling developers to define agent behavior while reducing the amount of supporting infrastructure they need to implement. By Daniel Dominguez
AI models have progressed to the point where their capabilities have real political consequences. Dealing with those consequences will require collective action.
If you’ve been curious about the emerging world of smart glasses, Prime Day is your chance to try some of the best models with a rare discount from Best Buy or directly from Xreal. The high-end Xreal One Pro is $549, $50 lower than the usual price, and the more entry-level Xreal 1S is $399, […]
You don't have a million labeled images or a GPU farm — and you don't need them. Transfer learning lets you stand on a model someone else trained and reach high accuracy with a few examples in minutes. Here's the idea, visualized. ♻️ Race scratch vs transfer: https://dev48v.infy.uk/dl/day17-transfer-learning.html The insight The early layers of a trained network learn general features — edges, textures, shapes — that are useful for almost any vision task. Only the last layers are task-specific. So why relearn edges from scratch? Two ways to do it Feature extraction: freeze the pretrained backbone, replace the final classifier with a small new "head," and train only the head on your data. Fast, needs little data. Fine-tuning: also unfreeze the top few backbone layers and train them at a low learning rate so you adapt without wrecking what they learned. The demo races two accuracy curves: "from scratch" crawls up and plateaus low (not enough data); "transfer learning" starts high and climbs fast. Tweak the example count and freeze/fine-tune to see them respond. Why it matters now This is exactly why fine-tuning an open LLM works: a foundation model already learned language; you adapt it cheaply. Transfer learning is what makes deep learning practical for the rest of us. 🔨 Full recipe (load pretrained → freeze → new head → train → optionally fine-tune low-LR) on the page: https://dev48v.infy.uk/dl/day17-transfer-learning.html Part of DeepLearningFromZero. 🌐 https://dev48v.infy.uk
Check how on-premises AI solutions empower enterprises to safeguard sensitive code, ensure data residency, and maintain full compliance without compromising performance. Why privacy and security matter in AI-powered development? As enterprises increasingly adopt AI to automate code reviews, testing, and vulnerability scanning, ensuring data privacy becomes paramount. Cloud-based AI tools may expose sensitive source code, customer data, or intellectual property to external risks. By contrast, on-premise AI tools allow organizations to keep data within their controlled environments by aligning with data sovereignty and compliance requirements like GDPR and CCPA. According to Gartner, by 2026, 75% of organizations will demand AI solutions that guarantee strong data residency and compliance assurances. What are on-premise AI tools for software development On-premise AI tools are artificial intelligence solutions that are deployed and operated within an organization’s own infrastructure, rather than relying on external cloud services. In the context of software development, on-premise AI allows teams to leverage advanced AI capabilities such as code analysis, automated testing, and security scanning while keeping all data and processes within their own controlled environment. Core components of on-premise AI infrastructure include: Hardware: servers, GPUs, and storage devices physically located on-site or in a private data center. Software: AI models, orchestration tools, and management platforms installed and maintained by the organization. Security Measures: firewalls, access controls, and monitoring systems tailored to the organization’s specific needs. Examples of on-premise AI tools in software development: AI-powered code review platforms installed on internal servers automated vulnerability scanners running within the company’s network machine learning models for test automation, hosted locally. Primary connection to data privacy: on-premise AI ensures that sensit
Deixa eu adivinhar. Você tá com um projeto Laravel rodando, tem uns 5, 10, talvez 15 formulários que recebem CPF. Cadastro de cliente, cadastro de fornecedor, atualização de perfil, checkout, área administrativa… e em cada um desses lugares tem aquela mesma lógica de validação de CPF. Copiada. Colada. Com pequenas variações. E tá tudo bem. Até o dia em que o cliente pede pra mudar uma regra. Ou um bug aparece em um formulário e funciona normal no outro. Aí você abre o projeto, dá um Ctrl+Shift+F procurando "cpf" e… surpresa: tem oito lugares diferentes com a mesma validação. Com mensagens de erro escritas de oito jeitos. Uma delas até com erro de digitação. Já passou por isso? Então senta que essa conversa é pra você. O crime acontecendo em câmera lenta Olha esse cenário aqui, que eu garanto que você já viu (ou escreveu): // app/Http/Requests/StoreClienteRequest.php public function rules () { return [ 'cpf' => [ 'required' , function ( $attribute , $value , $fail ) { $cpf = preg_replace ( '/[^0-9]/' , '' , $value ); if ( strlen ( $cpf ) !== 11 ) { $fail ( 'CPF inválido.' ); return ; } // ... mais 20 linhas do algoritmo }], ]; } E aí, três dias depois, no outro Form Request: // app/Http/Requests/StoreFornecedorRequest.php public function rules () { return [ 'cpf' => [ 'required' , function ( $attribute , $value , $fail ) { $cpf = preg_replace ( '/[^0-9]/' , '' , $value ); if ( strlen ( $cpf ) !== 11 ) { $fail ( 'O CPF informado não é válido!' ); // mensagem diferente, claro return ; } // ... mais 20 linhas quase iguais, mas não exatamente }], ]; } Multiplica isso por 8 telas. Agora imagina o seu "eu do futuro" tentando manter isso. Dá pra sentir a dor daqui. DRY: a sigla que vai salvar seu projeto (e sua sanidade) DRY significa Don't Repeat Yourself . Em bom português: não se repita, caramba. A ideia é simples: cada pedaço de conhecimento (uma regra de negócio, um cálculo, uma validação) deve existir em um único lugar no seu sistema. Se precisar mudar, você muda em u
I run Vite on almost everything. Astro sites, Nuxt projects, a small group of libraries I maintain on the side. The build tool is the part of the stack I think about least, because it just works. So when the thing under all of that changes twice in three months, I read the release notes properly. Here is what actually changed, what breaks, and the part that made developers argue for a week straight. For Five Years, Vite Ran on Two Bundlers When Vite launched, it made a pragmatic bet. esbuild for the dev server, because it is fast. Rollup for production, because its output is well optimized. Two tools, two jobs. It worked. But it had a cost. Two bundlers meant two configs, two sets of quirks, and output that could drift between dev and prod. You tuned one, and the other behaved slightly differently. Vite 8 ends the split. It shipped on March 12 with a single bundler called Rolldown, written in Rust, with the Rollup plugin API on top. Under Rolldown sits Oxc, a Rust parser and transformer that does the TypeScript and JSX work Babel used to do. One language. One pipeline. Dev and prod finally agree. This Is a Pattern, Not a One-Off esbuild (Go) made webpack look slow. Bun did the same to Node for some workloads. Biome replaced Prettier and ESLint and runs many times faster. Now Rolldown does it to Rollup and esbuild at the same time. Every time a core JavaScript tool gets rewritten in a compiled language, the same thing happens. The speed jump is large enough to make the old version look broken. The interesting part is not the speed. It is the compatibility. These Rust tools do not ask you to relearn your stack. Rolldown speaks the Rollup plugin API. Biome follows ESLint and Prettier conventions. The migration is designed to be boring, and boring is the point. The Numbers, With a Grain of Salt The headline figure is real. Linear cut its production build from 46 seconds to 6 . Vite reports builds 10 to 30 times faster than the old Rollup path. Other large projects repor
Three bugs this month. All three looked fixed before they broke. The date was quoted in 51 out of 52 posts. The model was pinned to a specific version. The upload feature had been working in production for weeks. Each one passed the obvious checks and failed somewhere else. That's the theme for this Friday Fixes: the fix that wasn't. Not bugs that went unnoticed, but bugs where a defense existed and the failure found its way around it. 1. The Unquoted Date, Part Two If this one sounds familiar, it should. I wrote an entire Friday Fixes post about this exact bug class five weeks ago. An unquoted YAML date. gray-matter parsing it as a Date object instead of a string. A crash downstream. Last time it took down /admin/drafts . The fix hardened formatDate() to coerce Date objects before calling .includes() . I verified it. I shipped it. I wrote 2,000 words about it. I moved on. This time it took down the homepage. The symptom: vibescoder.dev loaded for a split second, then flashed to Chrome's "This page couldn't load" screen. Every browser, every profile, every device. The site was completely dead to visitors. The twist: curl returned HTTP 200 with ~900KB of fully rendered HTML. The server was fine. The crash was happening during React hydration in the browser, invisible to any server-side test. The cause: A new post had date: 2026-06-19 in its frontmatter. No quotes. gray-matter parsed it as a Date object. In posts.ts , the code does const meta = data as PostMeta and then spreads ...meta into the return value. The as PostMeta cast told TypeScript the date was a string . At runtime, it was a Date . That Date object flowed through the server component, through the RSC serialization boundary, and into PostListWithFilters , a "use client" component. React couldn't hydrate it. No global-error.tsx existed to catch the crash. Dead page. Why the May fix didn't prevent this: Because the May fix was in the wrong layer. It hardened formatDate() , the function that happened to cras
Arduino's Raspberry Pi-like microcomputer the Uno Q is joining many other devices in getting a price hike this week. The 2GB version of the Uno Q, which is powered by a Qualcomm Dragonwing QRB2210 processor, will increase in price from $44 to $59, while the 4GB model is getting a slightly steeper increase from $59 […]
While experimenting with GRPO training, I kept running this shit that when reward increases, it becomes difficult to tell whether the policy is genuinely improving or simply exploiting the reward function. So I built a small library called rewardspy that wraps an existing reward function and continuously monitors indicators that often precede reward hacking. It currently tracks things like rolling reward statistics, reward variance collapse, reward component imbalance, response length drift, reward slope changes, GRPO group collapse, anol. This is my first major RL project so I would absolutely love some technical advice Check it out here: https://github.com/AvAdiii/rewardspy (credits to u/Oranoleo12 , posting on their behalf) submitted by /u/BaniyanChor [link] [留言]
Prime Day is making it much easier to pick up a Fitbit without spending more than you want. Both the Fitbit Charge 6 and Fitbit Ace LTE are on steep discounts today. Right now, you can buy the Charge 6 for $85.45 ($74.5 off) at Amazon, while the kid-friendly Fitbit Ace LTE is $69.99 (a […]
We are all familiar with the Corgi event: https://x.com/mfts0/status/2070080422482977095 With the barrier to create new apps having dropped significantly thanks to LLMs, I am seeing more cases about copyright and unfair competition. I've seen and participated in some of these cases. Usually expert witnesses are required. Curious to hear the community stance on this one. "Now software developers are feeling what authors and artist felt". https://x.com/PriyRanjan96/status/2070204156703568377 There
This is just an opinion of what I experience and am witnessing, but looking at how LLMs scale feels like I've seen it before: with CPUs trying to outrun Moore's Law and break the rules of physics. Heat, power leakage, and diminishing returns made it increasingly expensive to squeeze out even small gains in clock speed. The GHz race shifted because it had to. For LLMs, more compute, more data, more parameters, and everything just keeps getting better? That curve seems to hit a ceiling and innovation needs to succeed the scaling race now. History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. What learnings can we make from history to "predict" a potential future? History In the early 2000s, CPUs ran into a wall, a very physical one ^^ So makers adapted. Instead of crunching every single watt out of a single core, multi-cores became common. Athlon 64 x2, Pentium D, PS3 with its heavy Cell approach. From linear to parallel. From sequential to multi-threaded (and funny race conditions ;). Talks of distributed systems, SIMD/MIMD and new benchmarking spawned into what we have today. We still use CPUs, but differently. We still have Memory, but think about Cache, RAM, GPU or Unified. Same same, but different. Innovation because of limitation. Present I feel something similar is about to happen to gen AI. Yes, there are improvements in different areas, some in scaling, some optimisation, some performance, but the slope is becoming slippery. The last 12 months went from "Opus 4.5 is the pinnacle" to "What the hell is wrong with Claude?". The perfect (business) storm of scaling execution! But the low-hanging fruits have been eaten and the crops don't grow as fast anymore. Costs rise quickly, latency becomes a constraint, and even large context windows feel more like extensions than breakthroughs. What remains is more incremental, more expensive, and more complex. You could argue the whole venture of "agents" is the same multi-core experience repeating itself. A different kind of orch