X日报 · AI科技

Introducing Claude Sonnet 5, our most agentic Sonnet yet.

It makes plans, uses tools like browsers and terminals, and runs autonomously at a level that just a few months ago required larger and more expensive models. https://t.co/UKK8G7ww5h

Introducing Claude Science, a new app designed with every stage of research in mind.

Artifacts traced to their code, environments managed on demand, and 60+ optional scientific databases that you can connect.

Available now in beta. https://t.co/HKhLknxLJO

Claude Fable 5 will be available again globally tomorrow.

After a series of productive conversations with the US government, we're redeploying the model with a new set of classifiers to target and block more cybersecurity tasks. In the near term, some routine tasks like coding and debugging will fall back to Opus 4.8. We’ll continue to refine these classifiers over the coming weeks to reduce false positives and better distinguish genuine misuse from legitimate requests.

We’ve also begun drafting a consensus framework—with Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and other Glasswing partners—for assessing the severity of AI jailbreaks and how AI developers should respond to them. We invite other industry partners and model providers to join us in this effort.

Finally, we’re scaling up our collaboration with the US government on model testing and safeguards. This will include pre-release access to models and safeguards for evaluation, information sharing on jailbreaks and misuse, and dedicated resources for joint research.

Thank you to our users for your patience, and to our partners across the government, industry, and the research community who worked alongside us to make Fable 5 available again.

Read our full blog: https://t.co/VHyum831ri

Good new first: Sol is a smart, efficient, and a significant step forward. It is the same price as GPT-5.5. Also launching in the GPT-5.6 family is Terra, with 5.5-level performance at half the price.

Bad news: at the request of the US government, it is launching today in limited preview instead of the open access launch we were planning on. We are working with the government to get to general availability as fast as we can.

I think it is quite reasonable to roll out models--especially as they reach significant new levels of capability--in this way. It fits with our long-held strategy of iterative deployment. But this isn't quite the process that we think is optimal.

Now we will with the government to attempt to get to a transparent, reliable process for early access, and to ensure that as long as our safeguards work as intended we can release widely. We want to be a reliable, dependable partner that works with all stakeholders, and we also want to live by our mission of benefiting all of humanity. I believe the government shares most of our goals, and that they are overall doing a good job in a very difficult situation.

We will work as quickly as we can to get this model in your hands and we hope you will love it.

GPT-5.6 Sol preview — it's a good model: https://t.co/UihzcpfR22

Gemma 4... intelligence for everyone on device! https://t.co/74UgJM6FAN

Introducing Nano Banana 2 Lite 🍌 and Gemini Omni Flash 🔮, our new generative media models in the Gemini API and AI Studio!

Nano Banana 2 Lite is extremely fast (<4s image) & cheap ($0.034 / 1K image).

Omni Flash is SOTA at video editing at $0.10 / sec, same as Veo 3.1 Fast! https://t.co/qDxRpqpX5E

Neuralink has solved through-dura electrode implantation!

This is a very big deal, as it greatly improves the safety and ease of interfacing with the brain.

The dura is the brain's armor: a membrane so tough that a surgeon normally cuts through it with a scalpel. For the first time in our clinical trials, we inserted the electrode threads of our implant straight through the dura and into the cortex, keeping the dura intact.

Here's how we did it 🧵

We’re sharing the next major milestone in our non-invasive brain-to-text decoder research: Brain2Qwerty v2.

Building on v1, which was published today in @Nature, Brain2Qwerty v2 is the highest-performing end-to-end pipeline capable of real-time sentence decoding from raw brain signals. It advances beyond character-level performance to decoding words and semantics, enabling accuracy for overall communication.

We believe this research has the potential to make a real difference for the millions of people who suffer from brain lesions or disorders that prevent them from communicating.

🧵👇

To help accelerate neuroscience breakthroughs, we're releasing the full training code for Brain2Qwerty v1 and v2, and our partner, @bcbl_, is releasing the v1 dataset.

Learn more and explore the artifacts here: https://t.co/bFdwWdAexb

JUST IN: Ford rehires more than 300 veteran human engineers after it says AI failed to deliver the same level of expertise.

OpenClaw is now on iOS + Android 🦞

📱 Native mobile apps, finally
💬 Agents in your pocket
🔔 Channels, tasks, replies on the go

Run agents from wherever your thumbs are.

iOS: https://t.co/7LHHc9htgM
Android: https://t.co/X0Wuh2uA8w

As engineering, product, design, DS, etc. melt into a new kind of role, I was reflecting on what roles might look like in the future. For example, when I look at the Claude Code team I see what I think is five archetypes:

1. Prototyper: comes up with brand new ideas; churns out many ideas, most of which don't ship
2. Builder: quickly turns a prototype/idea into production-grade product/infra
3. Sweeper: cleans up the UI, simplifies the code and system, unships, optimizes performance
4. Grower: takes a product that has been built and iterates on it to improve Product-Market Fit
5. Maintainer: owns a mature system to make it secure, reliable, fast, and efficient as it scales

Many people span across 2 roles, and sometimes 3 roles. I also notice that these roles are not really tied to job function -- eg. across Anthropic, some designers match category 1, some 2, some 3; same for engineers, PM, DS.

A healthy team needs a mix of these, depending on the product:

- A product that is new and pre-PMF needs people that are strong at 1+2+3
- A product that is growing and has found PMF needs 2+3+4 and some 5
- A product that has strong PMF needs 3+4+5 and some 2

Maybe product roles of the future will look more like this, and less like the domain-specific roles of today?

“Loop engineering” is a hot buzzphrase after mentions of it by Boris Cherny (Claude Code’s creator) and Peter Steinberger (OpenClaw's creator) went viral on social media. Loops are now a key part of how we get AI agents to iterate at length to build software. In this letter, I’d like to share my 3 key loops, shown in the image below, for building 0-to-1 products. These loops guide not just how I build software, but also how I decide what software to build.

Agentic coding loop: Given a product specification and optionally a set of evals (that is, a dataset against which to measure performance), we can have an AI agent write code, test its work, and keep iterating until the code is bug-free and meets its specification. This idea of closing the loop took off around the end of last year, and it has been a game changer in enabling coding agents to work longer productively without human intervention. For example, over the weekend, I was building an app for my daughter to practice typing, and my coding agent could easily work for around an hour, using a web browser to check what it had built multiple times before getting back to me, without needing my intervention.

The engineering loop executes quickly. Every few minutes, the coding agent might build and test a new version of the software. I hear frequently from developers who are finding new ways to engineer more effective engineering loops. This is an active area of invention!

Developer feedback loop: In this loop, a developer examines the current product and steers the coding agent to improve it. Last year, a lot of developers (including me) were acting as the QA (quality assurance) function for our coding agents, manually finding bugs and then asking the agent to fix them. But with coding agents much more able to test their own code, the amount of time we need to spend on this function has decreased significantly. This allows us to make higher-level product decisions, such as what key features to offer, where the UI needs improvement, and so on.

The developer-feedback loop operates over time intervals between tens of minutes and hours — that's how frequently a developer might review a product and give feedback. In the case of the typing app, I changed my mind a few times about the visual design, what cat costumes she can unlock as she learns (she loves cats), and the user flow for a grown-up to log in and steer the child's learning experience.

When a developer has a clear vision for what to build, it is still a lot of work to translate that vision into a specification for a coding agent to implement. Further, after the developer has seen an implementation, they might update (or perhaps clarify) the spec to steer it toward what they want. If you find that the system repeatedly runs into certain problems, building a set of evals for the agent becomes useful.

AI-native teams are increasingly using AI to help shape product direction, for example, automating the gathering and analysis of usage data, summarizing written and verbal customer feedback, or carrying out competitive analysis. However, for pretty much all the products I’m involved in, I see humans as having a significant context advantage over current AI systems — we know a lot more than the AI system about the users and the context the product has to operate in — and thus humans play a critical role. Many people describe this human contribution as “taste,” but I prefer to think of it as humans having a context advantage, since that gives us a clearer path to helping AI systems get better. This also speaks to why this step can’t be automated: So long as the human knows something the AI does not, human-in-the-loop is needed to to inject that knowledge into the system.

External feedback loop: This includes a wide range of tactics like asking a few friends for feedback, launching to alpha testers, or putting the code into production with A/B testing. These tactics are usually slow, rarely taking less than hours and sometimes taking days or even weeks. This data informs the developer vision, which in turn continues to drive the detailed product spec, which in turn drives the coding agent.

With coding agents speeding up software development, more engineers are starting to play a partial product management role. For many engineers who are growing into this role, the hardest part is shaping the product vision and striking a balance between building (bridging the gap between vision and spec) and getting user feedback to evolve the vision. It is important to do both!

I will write more about how to do this in future posts, but for now, I find it encouraging that engineers are playing an expanded role (just as product managers and designers now do more engineering).

[Original text: The Batch]

There's a startup trying to build data centers in the ocean.

And it's INCREDIBLY fascinating:

Mass consumption of electricity and water is a growing bottleneck for data centers.

So by moving offshore, it eliminates both problems -- the ocean provides unlimited cooling, and the waves provide unlimited power.

There are also no engines, so the data centers drive themselves to their destination by using the shape of their hull to propel through waves.

Called Panthalassa.