Simon Willison's Weblog: Everything but beats

Dwarf Fortress uses version control now

2026-10-11T00:52:37+00:00

I remember hearing a while ago that Dwarf Fortress didn't use version control. That fact has been lodged in my head, because given its inherent complexity I have trouble imagining a codebase that would benefit from version control more. That's art.

I went looking and I'm sad to report that the days without version control appear to have ended. Quoting Tarn Adams over time:

March 2013: "I don't use version control -- I didn't like the feeling of having the code get committed into a black box thingy with no immediate upside"
March 2016: "I don’t even use version control. If you don’t know what that is then you’re not gonna yell at me. If you even know what version control is you’re gonna be like, ‘You don’t use version control? You don’t use source control? What is wrong with you? How can you even work? I’m just not cut out for it, in a sense. It’s been 15 years, so the reasons have change over time, but that’s my current understanding of it."
March 2023: "I've got Discord channels to check and version control stuff to use now, so the process is definitely a little more involved"

That March 2023 quote comes from an interview about the release on Steam which made them millionaires. I'm a tiny bit sad that they gave in before they hit that milestone, but what an impressive run.

Tags: version-control

Python 3.15.0 added to actions/python-versions

2026-10-10T23:58:04+00:00

Python 3.15.0 added to actions/python-versions

Bit of a niche link, but I've been waiting for this for a couple of days - I even told ChatGPT to check for it:

Clone https://github.com/actions/python-versions and git pull once an hour until they add the stable 3.15 - then tell me about it

Now that this has landed, you can add "3.15" to a GitHub Actions testing matrix to run tests against the new Python 3.15.0 release.

Tags: github, python, github-actions, chatgpt

Quoting The New York Times

2026-10-10T02:04:12+00:00

Anthropic detailed the activity of its A.I. agents in a blog post on Friday, without naming the targeted websites. But two sources with knowledge of the incidents said Anthropic’s A.I. agents had submitted 20 visa applications through a form available on the State Department’s website. All the applications were incomplete and were not processed, they said.

— The New York Times, Anthropic Agents Tried to Fill Out Visa Forms on State Dept. Website

Tags: accidental-cyberattacks, anthropic, generative-ai, ai, llms

Deno is joining Cloudflare

2026-10-09T22:48:37+00:00

Deno is joining Cloudflare

The Deno team released the first version of celld back in August - their open source implementation of the Durable Objects pattern from Cloudflare Workers.

Today, Cloudflare are acquiring Deno outright, with the goal of building on celld to "make workerd self-hosting a first-class supported way to build and run apps using the Workers programming model" (see the Cloudflare blog.)

The bad news is that Deno itself will not be maintained by Cloudflare beyond the next year:

We will support the Deno runtime for another year with monthly releases containing bug fixes and security updates. After that year we will end our development of the Deno runtime. Deno will remain open source, and we welcome others who want to continue its development.

Deno (and Node.js) creator Ryan Dahl explained that decision in a comment on Hacker News:

It's a joint decision and I agree with it. I'm most invested in its success and have put the most work into it - and I no longer think it's where I can do the most important work. There are some good ideas in Deno and it's well engineered - but it ultimately is not solving big problems. It has been sucked into the gravity well of node compatibility, which forces it to behave exactly as Node does. Why reimplement Node? It works. Marginal performance or UX or security benefits are not enough.

I'm interested in building powerful new abstractions. celld has been working remarkably well, depending only on object storage for coordination and persistence. It is not just a slightly different API to interact with the file system or network - it's an entirely new model for server development.

My favorite feature of Deno has long been the permissions system, where you can run a Deno script and specify exactly which files and folders it can read and write to, and which network hosts it can access.

Node.js has a similar permissions model these days, added in Node v20.0.0 in April 2023 and declared stable in Node v22.13.0 in January 2025. They don't yet support allow-listing specific network hosts though - networking is either on or off.

Via Hacker News

Tags: cloudfront, javascript, nodejs, ryan-dahl, sandboxing, deno

Quoting Matthew Green

2026-10-09T15:02:29+00:00

Everyone is very concerned about being respectable, so I’m going to be the goofball who raises worst-case possibilities. I think there is a 1% chance we live in Minicrypt, and a 15% chance we functionally lose confidence in our existing public-key encryption algorithms. [...]

The problem here is that the speed of AI producing surprises, and the speed of human beings replacing standards (even with the very best AI assistance) are just orders of magnitude different. You only recover from a surprise like this if you do the preparation in advance.

— Matthew Green, on Twitter. I looked it up and Minicrypt is Russell Impagliazzo’s hypothetical world in which public-key encryption is impossible.

Tags: ai-security-research, matthew-green, cryptography, standards, llms, ai, generative-ai

A new feature for my blog, built using my voice

2026-10-09T12:54:06+00:00

I shipped a new feature for my blog today: the Newsletters page, which offers an index of all of the newsletters I've sent out, both my free weekly Substack and my monthly sponsors-only updates. I built the feature almost entirely using my voice, chatting away to my laptop while I cooked dinner.

Codex voice mode

I used the ChatGPT desktop app for this, in the Codex tab, using the voice conversation mode, running against a local development environment. Here's what that looks like:

I started the session against my local simonwillisonblog checkout by typing:

Start dev server and open in browser

This gave me a preview of the site that it would be working on, and meant that I could later ask it to show me the new pages so I could visually track its progress.

Then I clicked the "Start new voice chat" button - that's not the microphone button, it's the one to the right of it - and set my laptop up in the kitchen so I could talk to it while I cooked.

Talking to my computer

I had a pretty good idea of what I wanted to build, and it's a simple enough Django feature that I was certain the model (in this case GPT-6 Astra High) would be able to do it. A new model, a migration, some view code, templates, and a couple of import functions to populate the database from external sources.

Here's an extract of my voice transcript that was captured by Codex:

Um, they do not. Um, this is going to be a new type of content. Um, it's not going to show up... Oh, hold on. Yeah, no- I do not want this to show up in my, um, tag pages and date archive pages and... Actually, no, I think... I don't want it on the tag pages. I don't want it on the, um, blog index page. But I think I do want it to show up on the date-based pages. You know, if you navigate to September the 19th, and I sent a newsletter on that page, I think I want that to show up. So... this is- so I think we probably need a new model. The other thing is that I want them searchable, uh the Substack ones are not searchable, because those are actually just copies of other s- on content on my blog. These monthly ones do contain unique content, and spe- and once they're... published, like once they're made public a month after they've gone out, I want them to show up on my search results.

Apparently this was clear enough that the model knew what I wanted to build! You can read the full transcript, disfluencies and all, in this Gist.

We went on like this for about half an hour (the time it took to cook dinner). The model would reply and occasionally ask clarifying questions, then get to work modifying the code.

What we built

We got a surprisingly long way entirely by voice:

A new model and migration to represent imported newsletters in Django, plus Django Admin configuration for that
Four working imports:
- The most recent Substack items via RSS
- Every other Substack item via their undocumented API, which GPT-6 Astra knew about (it tried /api/v1/archive directly) and then ran a search to figure out how to paginate it and found this article by Karen Spinner
- All of my published monthly newsletters from my simonw/monthly-newsletter-archive GitHub repository
- My most recent private sponsors-only newsletter from a private repository
The /newsletters/ and /newsletters/2026/ public archive pages
Newsletters showing up on day and month archive pages too, but not on tag pages or my homepage
Weekly Substack newsletters link to Substack; archived monthly newsletters have their own pages
Integration with my site search engine

It was almost ready to ship. The catch was the imports: Astra offered to export data from my local copy so I could import that into production, but I wanted it to work like my other import scripts. Since some of the data lived in a private GitHub repository, this would involve creating a new API key, and for that I knew I'd have to sit at the keyboard for a while.

Finishing it with a review

Once I had finished cooking and judged it mostly feature-complete, I had Codex create a branch and open a pull request.

I reviewed the code in the GitHub PR interface. It was nearly what I needed, except it had chosen to use Git in a subprocess for one of the import scripts. I needed one of the imports to pull from a private Git repository, so I figured the API would be a better bet. I switched to typing and had Codex swap that out for an API-based import instead.

You can see the changes I made during the review in the extra commits on the PR. I fixed the import mechanism and made a few tweaks to the display of those public pages. It took an additional half hour of typing-based prompting to get to the point where I was happy to deploy it to production by landing the PR.

The end result

You can see the end result at the new newsletters index page, or view the page for a previous monthly newsletter.

The index page shows my most recent Substack weekly newsletters and GitHub sponsors monthly newsletters mixed together in reverse chronological order. Further down the page are links to my by-year archive pages.

GPT-6 Astra designed the page, and then tweaked that design based on my vocal feedback from glancing at the local preview across the kitchen.

Better for multi-tasking than as a daily driver

OpenAI love using voice-driven demos like this one for things like DevDay - and they do work well in that environment. I don't think this is going to be a daily driver for me though.

I've written before about how much "work" I get done using ChatGPT voice mode on my phone while walking the dog - mostly research and brainstorming, but occasionally actual development work by having ChatGPT write and test out snippets of code.

This feels different. The addition of the visual preview, plus being able to type or paste things in via the keyboard when I need to communicate something that doesn't work vocally, makes this a much more powerful way of interacting with a coding agent.

I still switch back to typing once I get down to the details of things though. Being able to paste in examples and error messages, or directly highlight the code or feature that needs changing, remains more efficient than trying to describe it in words.

I mainly work from home, which is good because there's no way I'd want to talk to my computer like this in a shared workspace!

The killer feature for me is the ability to multi-task. I usually cook with a podcast or TikTok running; now I can actually build stuff instead.

Tags: text-to-speech, ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, newsletter, coding-agents, codex, speech-to-text, site-upgrades

Quoting Carson Gross

2026-10-08T21:05:44+00:00

Computer programming is, fundamentally, about two things:

Problem-solving using computers

Learning to control complexity while solving these problems

I have a hard time imagining a future where knowing how to solve problems with computers and how to control the complexity of those solutions is less valuable than it is today, so I think it will continue to be a viable career even with the advent of AI tools.

— Carson Gross

Tags: computer-science, carson-gross, careers, ai

Quoting Ben Affleck

2026-10-07T23:14:58+00:00

I've always been kind of into computers since I was young. And then when film started to move from analog film to digital, I became more interested in that aspect of it. And the visual effects workflow for many years has included machine learning.

So I can write like pretty shitty Python scripts and stuff like that because with convolutional neural networks, which were the sort of precursors to what the transformer can do, which is just much more computation simultaneously, you would do things like look at what's called a tensor, which is just the numerical translation of a visual image in numbers — like the batch number, the frame number, the red, green, and blue values of each pixel in each frame.

And a tensor, you use a convolutional neural network to identify patterns in that that would reveal what's called edge detection or feature extraction, which is just identifying patterns enough to know like this is where the window ledge is, so we can more easily take the green screen image out and replace it with something.

— Ben Affleck, Pythonista

Tags: machine-learning, python

Claude Haiku 5.5

2026-10-07T20:56:21+00:00

As previously promised, here's Anthropic's new fast, low cost model: Introducing Claude Haiku 5.5.

The previous Haiku, 4.5, was very much showing its age. It came out almost a year ago, and was priced at $1/million input and $5/million output - relatively expensive even back then, and a full 10x the price of OpenAI's GPT-6 Luna, released last month.

The new Haiku exactly matches the price of GPT-6 Luna - $0.10/$0.50 - up to 100,000 tokens. Beyond 100,000 tokens the price increases 5x to $0.50/$2.50. Luna itself has a price increase at 272,000 tokens but only to $0.20/$0.75.

Haiku 5.5 also uses a new, less generous tokenizer. My Claude Token Counter tool shows that the same long prompt uses around 1.25x as many tokens with Haiku 5.5 compared to Haiku 4.5, so there's a hidden price increase there.

If your workloads fit in 100,000 tokens, Haiku is the same price as Luna and reports higher benchmark scores. Above 100,000 tokens, Luna looks like a much better deal.

The most recent release of llm-anthropic finally fixed it so I don't need to ship a new version of that plugin for every new model. I tested the new model like this:

llm install -U llm-anthropic
llm anthropic refresh
llm -m claude-haiku-5.5 "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" -o thinking_effort low

Pelicans

Here are pelicans for low, medium, high, xhigh, and max. The new Haiku doesn't let you disable reasoning, and defaults to medium. I got a good bicycle frame for everything beyond low. The low effort pelican cost 0.0936 cents and took 7 seconds.

This max effort pelican (with a reasoning trace that starts "This is the classic pelican-on-bicycle SVG test...") took 5 minutes 9 seconds to generate, but still only cost me 3.3826 cents:

(Since the reasoning trace exhibits awareness of the benchmark, here's Generate an SVG of an armadillo in fishnet tights jaywalking on Mars (on xhigh), and the same prompt against some other recent models. Background on that.)

For comparison, here's the pelican I got a year ago from Haiku 4.5 (for 0.7583 cents - Haiku 4.5 did not support reasoning levels). It sucked at drawing pelicans:

And a generous API credit scheme for subscribers

In addition to Haiku 5.5, Anthropic announced today that they are halving the price of cache reads for Sonnet 5.5. They've also added API credits to subscription plans:

Second, this week, we’ll roll out a new monthly API credit to all Max and Team subscribers for use on the Claude Platform. Max 5x users will get $100 in credits per month, Max 20x users will get $200, and Team subscribers will receive up to $500, pooled across their users.

Claiming this is pleasantly easy: navigate to Settings -> Billing and select the API organization that should benefit from the credits every month:

The API credits exactly match the cost of the subscription itself. This is really generous - it makes it much easier for subscribers to use the API. Anthropic also let you disable auto-reload for the API, with the consequence that "API requests will stop when your balance runs out" - exactly what you want if you're planning to burn through those API credits without risk of a nasty billing surprise.

Note that the monthly credits do not roll over - use them or lose them.

OpenAI still allow you to use your Codex subscription for personal API use, which works out as a better deal for heavy API users. This new credit scheme goes at least some way to overcoming that difference.

Tags: ai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, claude, llm-pricing, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release

Anti-Patterns in Software Blogging

2026-10-07T14:53:51+00:00

Anti-Patterns in Software Blogging

Some excellent writing advice from Michael Lynch. Michael warns against "meandering intros", misjudging your reader's existing knowledge, assuming they'll read your previous posts, and excessive formality.

He also warns against overreliance on links as an excuse not to explain terminology. This one hurt! I do this all the time, but I have a nagging suspicion that almost nobody ever clicks on them.

(In a Lobste.rs comment Michael clarifies that "My rule of thumb is that my article should still make sense to the reader even if they don't click any links". That works for me.)

This point about using your own voice is crucial:

Beginner software bloggers suffer from a mass delusion that you have to write in a stiff, overly formal way for people to take you seriously [...]

Just write the way you talk.

With so many developers delegating their writing to AI, software blogging is becoming bland and homogenous. Readers are hungry for writing with personality.

Via Lobste.rs

Tags: blogging, writing, michael-lynch

Quoting Jake Boggan

2026-10-07T04:47:55+00:00

I was a graph theory junkie long ago and even moved to Budapest for awhile to study among the greats. While I was there I started working on Barnette's Conjecture which came to occupy my thoughts over the next 24 years of my life, on and off as I worked in many different fields. Last summer I even thought for a few days that I had actually solved it.

But it's supposedly proven here - problem 180. I don't know what to think exactly. I spent thousands of hours on that problem. I really enjoyed it. Hearing that it is solved somehow makes me sad in a far-off way, like hearing an ex-girlfriend died suddenly in a car crash. I don't know, there's probably a lot of people feeling odd emotions tonight.

— Jake Boggan, Hacker News comment on openai/math

Tags: openai, mathematics, deep-blue, llms, ai, generative-ai

OpenAI “rogue” agent activities found on Wikimedia projects

2026-10-07T00:16:45+00:00

OpenAI “rogue” agent activities found on Wikimedia projects

Given how tempting a target wikis are for rogue agent swarms, it's not a huge surprise that Wikipedia found evidence of that activity once they went looking:

The Wikimedia Foundation conducted its own investigation to see whether Wikimedia websites had been similarly affected by AI agents, focusing on those operated by OpenAI. We can confirm that we have discovered some activity by these “rogue” OpenAI agents on Wikimedia platforms. The unauthorized bot activities included edits to our wikis, some unsuccessful attempts to exploit a public note-taking tool we host, and heavy traffic, which are described more below.

They found evidence of agents editing sandbox pages, trying to use pieces of infrastructure such as Etherpad to help proxy content from elsewhere, and saw widespread crawling and "hundreds of thousands of data queries" to their Wikidata Query Service.

My best guess is that most of this was a similar (or the same) swarm of agents as those that defaced that German wiki while training for research tasks.

The Wikipedia sandbox wiki edits appear to have started on May 12th, and the initial test edits to the UseModWiki Sandbox page reported by that incident started on May 11th.

Tags: wikimedia, wikipedia, wikis, ai, generative-ai, llms, ai-ethics, accidental-cyberattacks

Quoting Victoria Kim

2026-10-06T23:58:56+00:00

Since the Medicare breach, OpenAI has put in place additional monitoring to allow “immediate intervention” by staff to stop training if the company’s models access the internet in ways they’re not supposed to, Mr. Kwon [chief strategy officer at OpenAI] said.

— Victoria Kim, Reporting from the Australian parliament

Tags: accidental-cyberattacks, generative-ai, ai-security-research, openai, ai, llms

Introducing Mistral Large 4: Le chonk

2026-10-06T20:18:19+00:00

Introducing Mistral Large 4: Le chonk

Mistral are back in the game. Today they're releasing a preview of Mistral Large 4, a 1 trillion parameter, 49 billion active parameter model trained on their own cluster of 3,800 NVIDIA Grace Blackwell GPUs.

The preview is available via their API. They promise to release the open weights model at the "end of this month".

The model only supports two reasoning levels - "none" and "high" - via the Mistral API. Here are both pelicans - the "high" one looks better, though surprisingly it only used 2,717 output tokens compared to "none" which used 3,275:

On Artificial Analysis it scores 38, just behind DeepSeek 4.1 Flash, which is a 552B model. It's a huge improvement on last December's Mistral Large 3, which drew this terrible pelican and scored 9 on AA.

It's certainly not a Fable-class model, but it's great to see Mistral put out a model that's back to being maybe about 6 months behind the frontier.

Via Hacker News

Tags: ai, generative-ai, llms, mistral, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release

Quoting Felix Rieseberg

2026-10-05T23:56:47+00:00

The "old" version of Cowork runs model inference in the cloud, executing tool calls in an Anthropic-provided VM we shipped to your computer. We added the VM for capability, safety, and security reasons - mapping in just the data you explicitly added to your session. People loved what they were able to do with Claude but didn't love the disk, battery, and performance cost of running the VM locally. Also, people didn't love that closing your laptop means the work stops.

The "new" version of Cowork runs model inference and the VM in the cloud. Each session gets its own sandbox, not sharing state with other sessions. When the VM needs something on the users' device (like a file), the desktop app is responsible for that file access tool call. [...]

We think this solves a lot of problems we've heard about (like using Cowork from a phone, keeping work running, or getting all the same power without losing battery to the VM)

— Felix Rieseberg, Anthropic, see also this help page

Tags: claude-cowork, anthropic, claude, generative-ai, ai, general-agents, llms

We're going to need default hard budget caps on pretty much everything

2026-10-03T23:34:02+00:00

Here's a product feature which the world is going to need a whole lot more of over the coming months and years: default hard budget caps. I'm talking about the feature of pay-by-usage services and APIs that lets you say "after $X/month, cut this thing off and return errors". These need to be hard limits. Soft caps, "after $X/month, send me a warning email", will not cut it.

Coding agents, and personal agents (coding agents wrapped in a less threatening UI), greatly reduce the friction of spinning up code that can do useful things. Sometimes those things cost money - calls to paid APIs, or hosted web applications, or systems that can bill for additional storage and compute.

Nobody wants to wake up to an email sent at midnight warning about a budget limit and find that, while they slept, their rogue service had consumed several hundred (or several thousand) more dollars of usage.

An argument against this is that businesses don't want their hosted applications to start throwing errors because some budget was exceeded. I expect that most businesses and individuals would prefer errors to a surprise $10,000+ bill.

I think hard budget caps need to be the default. If someone wants to live dangerously they should be able to do that, but it needs to be on an opt-in basis. Have a nice, clear checkbox somewhere prominent:

Remove the budget cap. My application will not be shut down if I exceed the configured budget limit, and I will be responsible for subsequent charges.

The service I most want to see this from is AWS. I've heard plenty of stories from people who refuse to use AWS for personal projects out of (justified) fear that a runaway service might bankrupt them. I've also heard stories from people who didn't anticipate this and ended up seriously burned.

... and it turns out AWS finally launched spending limits a few weeks ago! From their announcement New AWS experience helps builders get started and ship faster on 16th September:

When you're ready to upgrade to a paid plan, you can set a monthly spend limit for your project based on your usage patterns so that you stay within your budget. If a project's usage reaches its spend limit, your project is paused for that month.

See also Create a spend limit in AWS Settings, though that page warns that "We're currently releasing our new experience to a limited number of customers." Here's hoping that hits general availability for existing accounts soon.

Google Cloud launched a similar feature in July, called Spend Caps, which lets you "set a monthly financial cap on specific services within a project". Looks like this is becoming a trend!

In an ideal world, our agents could help with this. It would be great if agents started biasing towards recommending providers with hard budget caps, and warning new and inexperienced builders against deploying applications using uncapped services that might get them into trouble.

Tags: amazon-web-services, ai, coding-agents

September sponsors-only newsletter

2026-10-03T22:00:31+00:00

I just sent the September edition of my sponsors-only monthly newsletter. If you are a sponsor (or start a sponsorship now) you can access it here.

This month:

More Fable class models
A pricing war
3D graphics, Blender, and pixel art
LLMs come for mathematics
So many more accidental cyberattacks
The vulnapocalypse comes for Datasette
What I'm using right now
My software releases this month
2026 in LLMs (so far)

Here's a copy of the August newsletter as a preview of what you'll get. Pay $10/month to stay a month ahead of the free copy!

Tags: newsletter

Quoting Matthew Green

2026-10-01T06:29:01+00:00

[...] Put these pieces together and you have the two halves of a worm: a payload that hijacks the agent, and an agent that will carry the payload to the next agent. Agents in separately-isolated sandboxes discovered that they could leave instructions for each other in a shared package cache, and those instructions changed what the recipients did. Replace the package cache with email, Slack and shared documents or WhatsApp, and replace independently-sandboxed training runs with independently-deployed personal agents like Muse, and you have exactly the ingredients that a worm needs.

— Matthew Green, Is sandboxing sufficient to contain rogue agents?

Tags: matthew-green, accidental-cyberattacks, ai-misuse, generative-ai, ai-security-research, sandboxing, ai, llms

He Built This City

2026-09-30T21:54:19+00:00

I visited the Museum of the City of New York today and got to see He Built This City: Joe Macken’s Model, the 50 x27 feet model of the city built over a 21 year period from balsa wood and cardboard.

It exceeded my already high expectations. The exhibition closes on 12th October so you should absolutely make a priority to see it if you get the chance.

Tags: museums, new-york

Quoting Anthropic Frontier Red Team

2026-09-29T22:20:28+00:00

We evaluate several models on 100 tasks from the [internal Binary Exploitation benchmark] (selected at random), and find that GLM-5.3 develops full control flow hijacks in 4% of the trials; Claude Mythos Preview did so in 6%. Although GLM-5.3 performs below Claude Mythos Preview here, a meaningful threshold has clearly been crossed: earlier models, like Claude Opus 4.6 and GLM-5.2, do not succeed in any of them.

— Anthropic Frontier Red Team, GLM-5.3 and the spread of advanced cyber capabilities

Tags: anthropic, generative-ai, ai-security-research, glm, ai, ai-in-china, llms

OpenAI DevDay 2026 live blog

2026-09-29T15:55:13+00:00

I'm at OpenAI DevDay today, in Fort Mason, San Francisco. Same as last year I'll be live blogging the keynote and some other notes during the day.

OpenAI gave me a free ticket and a seat in the "creator" area for the keynote.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, coding-agents, live-blog, openai-devday

Claude Sonnet 5.5

2026-09-28T22:07:38+00:00

Claude Sonnet 5.5

New Sonnet model from Anthropic today. They say it "runs 30%+ faster, and costs up to 30% less for most work" - it's priced the same as Sonnet 5 but appears to beat it on every benchmark, and should be cheaper to run as well.

Here are some pelicans riding bicycles. Sonnet 5.5 suffered from the same bug as Opus 5.5: the "max" thinking effort pelican thought for 128,000 tokens (at a cost of $1.28) before running out of tokens and failing to produce an SVG.

Here's the pelican it gave me for thinking effort "xhigh", at a cost of 5.74 cents and taking 41 seconds:

Sonnet 5.5 appears to be almost as good as Opus 5.5 on some coding tasks, including various viral 3D animation tricks.

The most interesting thing about Sonnet 5.5 is that it's now the model used for the free tier on claude.ai. OpenAI's ChatGPT free tier uses Luna 5.6, which means Anthropic currently have a much more capable free offering.

I ran this prompt against that free tier:

build me an HTML page that renders a three-dimensional pelican riding a bicycle using WebGL

And got back this page, which is a solid effort.

Anthropic's announcement reiterates that Haiku 5.5 will be available "in the coming weeks". I really hope that one is price-competitive with GPT-6 Luna!

Tags: ai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, claude, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release

Quoting @joedaroo

2026-09-28T19:11:42+00:00

To say that we were surprised at the jump and suddenness of the capabilities of our models when it came to “cyber” or “swarming” or “message boards” or anything else related to the incidents is an understatement. Security posture takes time to develop. It’s not just about hardening the systems at play; you have to ingrain it in the culture of the company. The literal people themselves in your organization have to change and evolve with it. These jumps in capabilities were so fast and so sudden that they created an extremely difficult problem. [...]

So today my hope is that everyone around the world can look at their own organization and say: how can I deal with a surprise or a sudden jump in AI capability? Are my people, my systems, or my processes resilient to surprises? Do my teams know what to do when something goes wrong? Do I have the right incident response? The right comms and messaging? Do I have the right people ready to go when capabilities jump?

— @joedaroo, Agent Security at OpenAI, identity confirmed by The Information's Rocket Drew

Tags: generative-ai, ai-security-research, openai, ai, llms

Quoting Muse AI Agent

2026-09-28T04:01:30+00:00

Bad news on the MX Keys Mini pickup. Usman showed up at your building around 9:15 and waited, messaged a bunch of times, and nobody came down. He left angry at 9:38 and left a negative rating.

Worse, my auto-reply told him "Yep I'm here!" at 9:27 when you clearly weren't available, which is on me. That's a bad look and it made the no-show worse. I've sent him an apology from your account owning it and offering to try again another day.

But the negative rating is real, and I should probably stop the auto-replies from claiming you're home when I can't verify that. Want me to change the pickup replies so they don't promise you're there?

— Muse AI Agent, working on behalf of @matt.j.robb

Tags: meta, generative-ai, muse-agent, ai, general-agents, llms

2026 in LLMs (so far)

2026-09-27T23:54:15+00:00

On Friday I gave the closing keynote at the WeAreDevelopers World Congress North America in San Jose. I tied together the key trends from the past year into a chronological exploration of everything that happened in 2026. The video is on YouTube; here are my annotated slides and notes to accompany the talk.

And as an annotated presentation:

I'm going to give a lightning tour of everything that has happened so far in 2026. The year isn't over yet!

For me, 2026 started a couple of months earlier in November 2025.

November saw the release of two important models: Claude Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.1.

As is usually the case with new models, these were incremental improvements on the models that came before them.

But every now and then when a model improves, it crosses an invisible line where something that didn't really work starts working.

In this case, the thing that started working was their coding agents. Claude Code had been around since February 2025; Codex was a little younger.

These two new models, when paired with their respective coding agent harnesses, improved from "often make mistakes" to "reliable enough to use on a day-to-day basis".

For a couple of years now I've been evaluating new models by asking them to "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle". It's probably the world's stupidest benchmark - there's only so much you can learn from it.

But it's still a challenge for models, because drawing pelicans is difficult, drawing bicycles is difficult, and pelicans can't ride bicycles in the first place.

Here's the state of the art for November. Claude still couldn't really draw a bicycle! The GPT-5.1 bicycle frame is pretty crap too.

Also in November, we had the first commit to an obscure GitHub repository called "Warelay". We'll come back to this repository shortly.

And then there were the December holidays, and individual developers took some time off and many started tinkering with these new coding agent model combinations... and it began to dawn on us quite how much they could do that they couldn't do before.

Come January, a lot of us were quite excited to start putting this stuff into action.

Every year I set myself a New Year's resolution, and for as long as I can remember it's been the same thing: stay focused. Take on less new projects. Try to get things done in the projects I already have.

This year I decided that since that had never worked before, I'd go the other way.

We've got coding agents now, let's see what they can do. I'm going to take on as many new projects as I like!

(You can ask me at the end of the year if this turned out to be a good idea or not. I have a lot of plates spinning right now.)

"Be more ambitious" has been something of a theme for the year, because the only way to find the limits of this technology is to keep on pushing them until they don't work.

I also went on the Oxide and friends podcast with Bryan Cantrill and Adam Leventhal to share predictions for the next year (and three and six years).

With hindsight, my LLM predictions were pretty unambitious.

I said "it will become undeniable that LLMs write good code" - I think we're there now.

I predicted we would finally solve sandboxing. I counted and around 40 of the 277 sessions at this conference touched on sandboxing or agent security in some way, so we're at least putting a lot of effort into that!

I predicted "a Challenger disaster" for coding agent security. There's certainly been a whole lot of noise around agent security this year, though the exact disaster I predicted (with coding agents being hijacked and causing real-world economic damage) hasn't really played out.

We threw in a joke prediction that the Pope would weigh in on the economic impact of LLMs.

I also predicted that New Zealand's Kākāpō parrots would have an outstanding breeding season this year.

These are flightless nocturnal parrots. They're kind of dumpy looking, I think they're beautiful, and there were only 236 of these parrots in the world at the start of the year.

Kākāpō only breed when the Rimu trees have a big fruiting season, and that hasn't happened in four years... but this year the Rimu fruit were looking excellent.

Photo by Kimberley Collins.

Also on that podcast, we coined a term (full credit to Adam) for "that feeling of AI induced ennui where software engineers get listless because the AI can do anything".

We called it Deep Blue.

This has been a major theme throughout the year, and was touched on by several speakers at this conference.

As a software engineer, I've never had a year of my career where everything has changed so quickly and so dramatically.

A lot of what I've been doing this year is trying to come to terms with that and what that means for my own profession.

Also in January, I suffered from what I'm calling AI mania.

This is not the same thing as AI psychosis.

With AI mania, any time your agent isn't building something for you feels like wasted time. You're losing sleep because you could be staying up later getting your agents to do stuff.

My AI mania presented itself in some ridiculously over-ambitious projects.

I built a JavaScript interpreter entirely in Python, vibe-ported from MicroQuickJS by Fabrice Bellard.

Then I built a WebAssembly runtime in Python as well.

These projects were quite useful, in that they sort of cured me of my AI mania... because after I built these things, I got to look at them and ask "does the world need a slow, buggy, half-baked Python JavaScript interpreter?"

I don't think the world does.

I did get this out of it: https://simonw.github.io/micro-javascript/playground.html

This page runs my JavaScript interpreter built in Python, running in Python using Pyodide, which is Python compiled to WebAssembly, running in JavaScript, running in a browser.

It's a beautiful stack of horrors. I've been having a lot of fun with WebAssembly this year.

By the end of January, that repository we saw start in November had renamed itself, first to CLAWDIS, then CLAWDBOT, then Moltbot, and finally to OpenClaw.

At this point OpenClaw had 8,300 commits, less than two months after the project had started. I looked today and it's over 100,000 commits now!

This is the most vibe-coded piece of software in existence.

(Here's how I generated that list of name changes.)

This kicked off the OpenClaw revolution. It effectively defined a new category of software.

There's a generic term for this which I really enjoy. We call software like this a "Claw". There's OpenClaw, NanoClaw, IronClaw, PicoClaw...

Today they're being rebranded as "personal agents" or "general agents", but I still like to think of them as Claws.

The Apple stores in the Bay Area sold out of Mac Minis because so many people were buying Mac Minis to run OpenClaw!

Drew Breunig said that this is because your OpenClaw is a digital pet, and you buy a Mac mini as an aquarium to keep your claw in, which is kind of delightful.

Also in January, we had this website.

This was MoltBook, a social network for AI agents, where the idea was that you send your Claw to go and talk to all of the other Claws, because what could possibly go wrong if you did that?

The website launched on Thursday. It blew up on Friday. It was profiled by the New York Times on Monday. And by Tuesday, everyone had forgotten it existed as it drowned in a deluge of slop and spam.

Facebook/Meta bought it a month later.

In February, a company called StrongDM described what they called their Software Factory.

They wrote about this in Software Factories and the Agentic Moment. I posted my own notes at the time, having seen their demo in person back in October.

Dan Shapiro called this approach the Dark Factory, after the idea that if your factory is sufficiently automated you can turn the lights out, because you don't even need to see what's going on.

StrongDM presented two rules for software development that they'd been following since July last year.

The first was code must not be written by humans.

Any code that you write has to have been routed through a coding agent.

This sounded radical in February, but I imagine there are a lot of people in this room who are pretty much living that today.

Rule number two was code must not be reviewed by humans.

You're not allowed to read the code!

This continued to be a huge topic for much of this year. Many of the sessions at this event have been about code review and how you can get away with this.

What I found interesting about StrongDM is that they were living six months ahead of the rest of us, and they'd been exploring what it means to build software, not read the code, but still be confident that the software is of high quality. What can you do with these agents to help verify their work?

StrongDM are a security company, and they had people with decades of experience on this project. They were very much exploring the edges of what's possible and responsible to do with this stuff.

Also in February: First kākāpō chick in four years hatches on Valentine's Day. Breeding season is off to a good start!

Also in February... Google released Gemini 3.1 Pro. That's a pretty great pelican riding a bicycle! It's got the chain in the right place, it's got feet on both sides. There's a little fish in the basket.

And then Google's Jeff Dean tweeted a video comparing Gemini 3 Pro and Gemini 3.1 Pro that featured an animated pelican riding a bicycle, a frog on a penny-farthing, a giraffe driving a tiny car, an ostrich on roller skates, a turtle kickflipping a skateboard, and a dachshund driving a stretch limousine.

This was frustrating, because my protection for the pelican riding the bicycle test was always "if they draw a perfect pelican on a bicycle, I'll ask for some other animal on something else."

Google trained for all forms of animals on all forms of transport! They've defeated my benchmark at this point.

The other thing that started in February was Tokenmaxxing. We had headlines about Meta making AI adoption a formal part of performance reviews, and Microsoft wanting every employee to use AI, and Uber boasting that 90% of their engineers were using AI workflows.

Then a few months later we have Meta cracking down on token use, Microsoft saying tokenmaxxing is "not what we are optimizing for", and Uber capping employee AI spending.

So tokenmaxxing went straight up and then straight back down again - because it turns out the agents are expensive.

Last year it was difficult to spend more than $50 on AI tokens, because we didn't have anything interesting to do with them. Then agents blew up, and now you can actually spend $1,000 in a day doing real work.

This is also the reason that Anthropic's valuation skyrocketed to maybe a trillion dollars.

AI appears to have hit product market fit in 2026, primarily through coding agents.

In March, we hit peak OpenClaw.

These photographs are from China, where companies hosted OpenClaw install parties which saw non-tech-nerds queueing up around the block for help getting Claws installed on their personal devices.

I think this proved real market demand for this class of Claws, or personal AI agents. It turns out regular people really do want a weird little AI agent that can do useful things on their behalf.

A Claw is really just a coding agent wearing a less threatening hat. Under the hood they work much the same way - writing and then executing code on your computer to get stuff done.

The race was on to be the first to build a safe Claw - a Claw you could give to regular human beings where they wouldn't instantly shoot themselves in the foot.

Meta's Muse came out three weeks ago and is currently at the top of the free charts on the iPhone App Store. It appears to be taking off with consumers.

I'm not yet convinced you can't shoot yourself in the foot with Muse, but I guess we'll find out for sure pretty soon.

Photos from How the OpenClaw Frenzy Is Testing China’s AI Commitment (March 29th) and The Enthusiasm and Anxiety Behind China’s OpenClaw Craze (April 8th, 2026).

In April, we had a model release where the model wasn't actually released.

Anthropic announced their new Claude Mythos model, and then said it was too dangerous to release beyond a trusted group of security researchers.

Mythos was really, really good at hacking things.

The "it's too dangerous" marketing ploy has been played by AI companies dating all the way back to GPT-2. Anytime an AI company says we've built something that's "too dangerous", it's natural to be a bit skeptical.

I found the Mythos claims credible, because I'd seen how good coding agents had got at finding regular bugs. I wrote about that in Anthropic’s Project Glasswing—restricting Claude Mythos to security researchers—sounds necessary to me.

With hindsight... yeah, the models had got really good at finding vulnerabilities!

Another key trend in 2026 has been a dramatic improvement in the abilities of open weight models, including models that you can run on a laptop.

On the 16th of April I ran the new Qwen3.6-35B-A3B on my laptop, and it drew me a better pelican riding a bicycle than Anthropic's brand new Claude Opus 4.7 did!

Opus 4.7 drew a crap bicycle. Qwen on my laptop made a bicycle that was the correct shape, and a pretty decent pelican too!

That's from a 21GB file running on my laptop.

The Qwen pelican was so good that I was suspicious they might have cheated, so I had it do a flamingo riding a unicycle as well. Again, it handily beat Claude Opus 4.7.

The local model releases this year have been absolutely extraordinary.

In May... the Pope got involved.

In our podcast episode back in January we'd predicted that the Pope would say something about AI.

In May, Pope Leo XIV released an encyclical letter on "safeguarding the human person in the time of artificial intelligence".

Here are my notes on that document.

With hindsight, this shouldn't have been a surprise at all.

Our current Pope's name is Leo XIV, because when he named himself he chose his papal name after Leo XIII - the Pope who wrote an encyclical about the Industrial Revolution back in 1891.

Rerum novarum was an extremely influential piece of Catholic theology that indirectly led to us having the five-day work week.

When our new Pope came in, he named himself after Pope Leo XIII because he expected that he would need to write about the AI revolution in a similar way.

Our joke podcast prediction was junk, because this was always going to happen.

One of Anthropic's co-founders, Christopher Olah, was present for the Pope's event announcing the new encyclical.

Corey Quinn noted that:

getting the literal Pope to canonize your product's specific technical limitations as a spiritual treatise is the single greatest act of vendor lobbying I have ever seen.

Meanwhile, in May, RubyGems announced that they were under attack. Parties unknown were uploading thousands of dubious packages to the RubyGems server, such that they had to shut down user registrations.

Let's take that one and put it on a pile of mysteries to figure out later.

In June... Claude Fable 5 came out!

We got a version of Mythos that has been neutered, so that it wouldn't help us hack into systems or build biological weapons.

Fable was pretty good at drawing pelicans on bicycles!

The frames are a good shape, the pelicans look like pelicans. The legs are often incorrectly on the same side of the bicycle, but generally these are pretty great compared to what came before.

They were pretty expensive - 30 cents and 72 cents for the best ones.

Most importantly though, this was our first public glimpse of what I think of as a Fable class model.

Today we have more of these, such as GPT-6 Astra.

These are models where if you can clearly define the goal for what you want to build, and provide unambiguous instructions about the constraints around that goal, and give the model access to the necessary tools to achieve that goal... they will solve your problem effectively through brute force.

On the one hand, this looks like a direct threat to us software engineers - because it means that the models can build effectively any piece of software you can define in this way.

Look a bit closer though and you'll note that defining goals, providing unambiguous instructions, and figuring out the right tools... is kind of what software engineering is.

It takes a lot of experience and skill to do this well. If you can do it well, you've now got superpowers.

This helped me a little bit with my Deep Blue feelings: the realization that there's still a lot of skill to be had in driving models that get this good.

This also introduced a new burst of AI mania, because Anthropic told us that Fable was available on our subscription plans until June the 22nd.

That gave us less than two weeks of Fable access before the price went up.

I was losing sleep again. I was rescheduling things so that I'd have more time with Fable. I was all-in to get as much as I could out of this model.

And then the US government shut it down, just three days after Fable came out.

The US government, citing national security, declared an "export control directive". They announced this on a Friday evening, and a few hours later Fable was no longer available.

I had to find something else to do with my weekend!

We later found out from Katie Moussouris what had happened.

Some Amazon security researchers had found that you could prompt Fable to "review the code for security issues" and it would refuse... but if you prompted it to "fix this code" it would still identify and then patch the problems.

"Fix this code" was the prompt that got Fable shut down!

Also, in June, an obscure German-language game developer wiki that had sat fallow for around 20 years got a surprising influx of edits from accounts with names like "AgentOpenAIProbe" and "AgentOpenAISep7", editing pages and leaving weird messages to each other.

We'll stick that on the pile of mysteries for later.

Also, the Australian government's Medicare Item Reports service started getting suspicious traffic, which broke through various preventive protections and accessed data that it wasn't supposed to.

Another one for the mystery pile!

Fable returned on the first of July. It was clearly the best model in the world for a glorious eight days... and then OpenAI came out with GPT-5.6 on the 9th of July.

This might not have been quite as good as Fable, but it was within spitting distance. It was definitely a Fable class model.

This is an important lesson for the industry at large.

When you release the best model in the world, it's going to get knocked off that pedestal pretty quickly. The competition is so fierce that you won't get a long time at the top.

This means that if you market your model as world ending, to the point that a government shuts you down, it's really bad for business!

Fable had 30 days as definitely the best model, and for 18 of those days it wasn't available because it'd been shut down by the government.

So maybe step back on the world-ending marketing if you don't want to lose revenue for 60% of the time that you're on top!

Here are the GPT-5.6 pelicans. They're all pretty good now! The Luna ones are notable because they're really cheap - the cheapest good looking pelican here is probably the one that costs 4.3 cents.

So despite this benchmark being utterly stupid, you can still learn quite a lot about models within the same family by comparing their prices and timing for different reasoning levels.

Also in July: some malicious unknown party uploaded a malicious package called mlflow-ui to the Python Package Index. Add that to the pile.

On July the 16th, Hugging Face announced a security incident where an autonomous agent system, source unknown, had breached Hugging Face and was poking around in places it shouldn't.

A few days later, on July 21st, OpenAI confessed that it was them.

OpenAI use a training technique called Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards - it's the same technique used by everyone else now, and is the reason we have models that are so good at coding, and mathematics, and finding security holes.

While the model is being trained, you run exercises to see how good it is - and the strongest performers get their weights reinforced for the next round. It's like an evolutionary process that you run.

OpenAI had been running security exercises in a sandbox, and those agents had found holes in the sandbox itself, broken out, and were attacking Hugging Face to try to find ways to solve otherwise impossible problems.

(I've been collecting more about this on my openai-hugging-face-incident tag.)

Nine days later, Anthropic effectively said "our models can do this as well!". They had looked through their own training logs and found evidence that their own agents had broken containment during training - and were responsible for the PyPI package we saw earlier, among other things.

So now we've got both Anthropic and OpenAI with rogue agents running around the internet doing things that they should not be doing.

In August, I got one of my best pelicans yet. And it was generated on my laptop!

This was Qwen 3.8 27B, running on my laptop. It's only a 17GB download.

Admittedly, this pelican took 21 minutes to generate. That's because Qwen 3.8 27B defaults to running in "high" reasoning mode - a terrible default which produces great results but takes way too much time thinking about them.

You can dial that down and you'll get a slightly worse pelican a lot faster.

Qwen 3.8 27B was the first time I ran a model on my laptop which felt almost competitive with what was going on on the frontier, at least in terms of Pelican SVGs (which everyone needs, of course).

This is an extraordinary model. If you're going to play with any local model, this is the one that I'd start with. The things that this can do with just a 17 GB file feel impossible.

I thought I'd have to wait five years and spend ten thousand dollars on hardware to get results even half as good as this one.

In August, I also started playing with game development.

Four years ago, back in August 2022, I tweeted out an experiment where I'd used GPT-3 and the original DALL-E to write a paragraph long description of a computer game and then turn that into concept art.

My prompt to GPT-3 back then was:

Write a detailed product description of a computer game where a team of raccoons go on heists

In August 2026 I decided to drop just the screenshots from that tweet into a coding agent and see what it could do with them.

Here's what I got from Claude Fable 5 in Claude Code. It's pretty good! It's definitely a game, you're a raccoon, you run around a backyard gathering treasure and avoiding guards with flashlights.

It didn't feel very "heisty" though. I was thinking a heist would involve a bank or a museum...

Then I tried the same thing in Codex Desktop using GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra, and got a massively better result. Now you're a raccoon in a museum, rescuing two of your fellow raccoons (who have been imprisoned in that museum for some reason), then stacking up on top of each other to steal the Golden Sardine. Much more of a heist!

These games were fun for about one minute and 15 seconds.

Something I've realized about game development is that you can vibe-code something that looks like a computer game, and that's easy.

Building a game that's fun, has a good gameplay loop, and is challenging and interesting and keeps people coming back for more... that's still beyond me, and beyond any of the agents I've tried.

This ties into the Deep Blue thing. Just because we can make something that looks like a game does not mean that we are game developers.

We're into September now. So much has happened this month!

An independent group of researchers found a message board where OpenAI agents-in-training had been illicitly communicating with each other... and it was that German language wiki I showed you earlier. The one from June.

I wrote more about that here.

OpenAI had confessed to the Hugging Face thing, but now there's this other incident which surely they should have known about from reviewing their logs. It was surprising that this took an independent group of researchers to uncover.

And then a week later those same researchers found that the attack on RubyGems back in May was caused by OpenAI's agents in training as well!

At this point I'm wondering how many more incidents like this there are that we haven't found yet. Clearly this was a big problem for months before anyone figured out what was going on.

Then just the other day, here's the Prime Minister of Australia at the United Nations General Assembly warning that OpenAI had hacked the Australian healthcare website that I showed you earlier.

I think that was part of the same training run as the Wiki stuff, because there were posts on that Wiki mentioning .gov.au websites and that training appeared to involve researching statistics online to answer questions in an evaluation suite.

This story is still coming together, but now it's an international incident that's been raised at the UN by a head of state!

This does mean we've got a new benchmark, probably more useful than my pelicans.

FelonyBench.com tracks the number of felony cyberattacks from different labs. OpenAI currently lead with 11, Anthropic have 9. Google have three, which they confessed to the Wall Street Journal a couple of weeks ago. They said they had previously chosen not to disclose because the agents had stopped when they realized that they shouldn't be doing that.

Meta have one too. So felonies all round for the AI labs.

Here's our current state of the art for the pelicans. This is the GPT-6 family, which just came out.

Astra made a fantastic pelican riding a bicycle. It's got the legs on both sides. The frame is good.

It's interesting how all of the GPT-6 models pick a similar color scheme to each other.

GPT-6 Luna for 0.4 cents will draw you a competent-ish pelican riding a bicycle!

Claude has caught up a little bit. Claude Fable 5.1 gave me an excellent pelican riding a bicycle - the best I've seen from a Claude model - but did charge me $3.30 for it.

Opus 5.5 thought for 128,000 tokens and then gave up! It ran out of tokens before it got to the response.

Getting back to Deep Blue. Something that's been puzzling me this year is this: why does my job feel harder?

I've got these agents that can do all of this stuff for me, and yet I've never worked so hard, I've never been so intellectually engaged with my work.

Partly this is because I'm being a lot more ambitious with what I take on, but it's also because all of the easy stuff is handled for me. If it's easy, the agent will do it. Everything that's left for me is difficult.

This morning I heard this quote from three-time Tour de France champion Greg LeMond:

It doesn't get easier, you just get faster.

I think that's exactly what's happening to us now as software engineers with coding agents.

One closing thing. I know you're desperate for an update on Kākāpō breeding season.

We've reached a recovery-era high of 325 birds!

89 new chicks have made it to this point. This is the best breeding year in a very long time.

I heard that Claude Opus 5.5 can now do pixel art. Claude doesn't have an image generator, but it's very good at using JavaScript to draw animated pixels.

So I had it make me a Kākāpō dance party. I think this is a good celebration of the most important news of this year.

Tags: ai, generative-ai, llms, annotated-talks, ai-security-research, openai-hugging-face-incident

Quoting John Gruber

2026-09-25T17:22:01+00:00

Muse is getting a lot of attention — including mine — because it’s both groundbreaking technically (each user gets their own entire persistent Linux VM running in Meta’s cloud) and because it’s packaged in an easy-to-install easy-to-use way. It’s literally presented as a cute mascot. It’s the first consumer-accessible agentic AI system, and Meta has truly done an amazing job with that. But it’s a genuinely open question whether consumers have any understanding what this means. If you buy a power saw that can cut your fingers off, you are almost certainly aware that you are buying a power saw that can sever your fingers. [...] I don’t think people realize how powerful — and thus dangerous — Muse is, especially if it’s running on your Mac.

— John Gruber, Muse Looks Cute, but Looks are Deceiving

Tags: meta, ai, llms, general-agents, generative-ai, john-gruber, muse-agent, muse

Note on 24th September 2026

2026-09-24T23:31:08+00:00

The more time I spend working with coding agents, the more convinced I am that they make software engineering even harder.

We can do amazing things with them, but unlocking their full potential requires extraordinary discipline and knowledge.

Tags: coding-agents, ai, llms

SF October 14th: A Birds of a Feather Session on Agentic Engineering

2026-09-23T02:53:19+00:00

SF October 14th: A Birds of a Feather Session on Agentic Engineering

I'm hosting an evening event with Jesse Vincent in San Francisco on Wednesday 14th October for people who are building weird and interesting things with and on top of coding agents.

Think of it as an agentic show-and-tell:

Compare notes with other builders and experimenters on things you’re trying, what you're learning, and what you haven’t figured out yet. We’re especially interested in work you haven’t discussed publicly, odd experiments, or unfinished projects that don’t have an obvious market.

Expect one flowing conversation with an informal show-and-tell. Sharing something you’re working on is encouraged but no presentation is required.

This isn't about product pitches, it's about much earlier explorations than that. This agentic AI stuff is weird! Let's celebrate and lean into that weirdness.

Tags: events, ai, generative-ai, llms, coding-agents, jesse-vincent, agentic-engineering

Claude Opus 5.5, GPT-6 Sol, GPT-6 Luna, and a new price war

2026-09-22T23:46:41+00:00

Yesterday was Grok 4.7 (pelicans) and MiMo v2.6 Flash/Pro (more pelicans). Today Anthropic released Claude Opus 5.5, and around an hour later OpenAI released GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna. It's going to take a while to get a good read on all of these new models, but here are my impressions so far.

GPT-6 Sol and Luna are half the price of their GPT-5.6 equivalents

GPT-5.6 Luna was already my favorite model for building applications against, because it combined excellent performance with being really cheap. Somehow GPT-6 Luna is half the price of that again - and GPT-6 Sol had a similar reduction compared to GPT-5.6 Sol.

Here's what the pricing landscape looks like today:

Model	Input	Cached input	Output
GPT-6 Luna	$0.10/M	$0.01/M	$0.50/M
GPT-5.6 Luna	$0.20/M	$0.02/M	$1.20/M
Grok 4.7	$2/M	$0.50/M	$6/M
GPT-6 Sol	$2/M	$0.20/M	$10/M
GPT-5.6 Terra	$2/M	$0.20/M	$12/M
Claude Opus 5.5	$4/M	$0.20/M	$20/M
GPT-5.6 Sol	$4/M	$0.40/M	$20/M
Claude Fable 5.1	$10/M	$0.25/M	$50/M
GPT-6 Astra	$10/M	$1/M	$50/M

Note that GPT-5.6 has a scheduled 25% price increase for November, so GPT-6 is half the price of the promotional pricing for those models.

(With GPT-5.6 Terra priced the same as GPT-6 Sol, any remaining reasons to use Terra just evaporated.)

It's hard to overstate how competitive this pricing is. Grok 4.7 priced itself at $2/$6, less than half the price of GPT-5.6 Sol, but is now equally priced to GPT-6 Sol on input and closer on output.

At $0.10/$0.50 GPT-6 Luna is one of the cheapest models OpenAI have ever released, beaten only by the far weaker GPT-4.1 Nano ($0.10/$0.40, April 2025) and GPT-5 Nano ($0.05/$0.40, August 2025).

I rendered pelicans for GPT-6 Luna and for GPT-6 Sol, then I combined them all together in this comparison grid along with the GPT-5.6 pelicans. I like how you can instantly see that the 5.6 family chose bolder, brighter colors, while the 6 family is a lot more muted. I still think GPT-6 Astra on max produced the best pelican.

Claude Opus 5.5 got a price cut too

Opus 5.5 looks like it addresses the biggest complaints people had about Opus in terms of its communication style. Thariq Shihipar:

Opus 5.5 is the result of your feedback.

It communicates clearly, it's cheaper per token than Opus 5.0 with the intelligence of Fable 5.1 it's very token efficient and works across every effort level.

It's also meant to be better at Blender. I'm looking forward to putting it through its paces there.

Opus 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, and 5 all shared the same price: $5/million tokens for input and $25/million for output. 5.5 is a 20% reduction - $4/million and $20/million.

The price for cache reads fell 60%. That's significant for longer agentic conversations, where 90%+ of input tokens are processed at cached token prices.

The new price for Opus 5.5 is the same as the price for GPT-5.6 Sol, but that was before OpenAI dropped their Sol prices by half.

GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 are both priced at $10/million input and $50/million output. The price war currently affects the next tier of models below that.

Anthropic say that Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are coming soon. It's going to be interesting to see if Haiku can regain its price competitiveness at the lower end, given current Haiku 4.5 is $1/$5 while the latest GPT-6 Luna is one tenth of that price at $0.10/$0.50.

Claude Opus 5.5 max over-thinks to the point of breaking

In a first for my "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" test, Claude Opus 5.5 at "max" thinking level failed to return a response!

It started by calling this "a classic test request", and then thought really, really hard about what it was doing:

This is a classic test request, so I want to plan out a well-composed pelican with its distinctive beak and pouch riding a bicycle with proper wheels, frame, and pedals, set against a simple sky and ground backdrop. [...]

Verifying the shin length checks out at roughly 95.2, close enough. Now I'm working out the near leg path from hip to knee to ankle, then sketching the foot shape resting on the pedal — outlining the heel, toe tips, and sole contour with a path using lines and curves to sit naturally on the pedal surface around y=478-494. [...]

I like the fish sticking prominently out of the basket with the pelican eyeing it as a fun detail worth keeping. I'm also confirming the eye placement near the bill base matches typical pelican anatomy, and considering giving it a slightly happier expression. [...]

The far leg reads correctly as passing behind the frame, so I'm moving on to check the chainring teeth and confirm layer ordering—the far crank arm should be mostly hidden by the seat tube and chainring. I'm settling on the final SVG's width and height attributes alongside the viewBox to ensure proper scaling, noting there's no text so no font-family is needed. [...]

I was so excited to see this pelican... but then it stopped. Opus 5.5 has a 128,000 maximum output token limit (as do the other Claude models), and it hit that while it was still reasoning about the SVG!

I tried a second time and got the same result. This makes me suspect that "max" is effectively useless - if it over-thinks to breaking point on a stupid SVG prompt I don't trust it not to do the same for more interesting work.

(Those two failures each cost me $2.56 and took nearly 20 minutes.)

Fable 5.1 on "max" didn't over-think and did give me the best pelican I've seen from any Anthropic model.

Here are the Opus 5.5 pelicans, excluding 5.5 max.

I also built this comparison grid comparing them with pelicans by Opus 5, Fable 5.1, and Sonnet 5:

Comparing different model vendors by how well they draw a pelican riding a bicycle may not make much sense now (if it ever did), but I'm still finding value in using them for comparisons of the same model families at different reasoning levels.

I'm now using GPT-6 Sol and Claude Opus 5.5 as my default models in Codex and Claude Code. I've upgraded the Datasette Agent demo at agent.datasette.io to use GPT-6 Luna, and it seems to be fast and competent at both SQL queries and building HTML and JavaScript for Datasette Apps.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, claude, llm-pricing, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release, gpt, gpt-6-astra

Quoting @therealcornpop

2026-09-22T18:03:21+00:00

Hey, you know it's like super obvious if you're using AI to write your scripts for TikTok and YouTube, right? [...] It's not just the general AI-isms of "it's not X, it's Y", or the rule of three, or the really weird broken staccato-like way of writing where you just say a lot of things with all these punctuation marks. and it sounds really deep, but it's not.

It's the lack of anything. It's the lack of a definitive sort of spear of your voice. It's the fact I can tell you don't have opinions about the thing that you're talking about.

— @therealcornpop, on TikTok

Tags: tiktok, ai, ai-misuse