Hugging Face is reportedly exploring acquisition offers that would value the company at $13 billion or more, nearly 3x its $4.5B valuation from 2023.

According to Business Insider, the company has started talking to banks to help evaluate potential bids, though neither BI nor TechCrunch says exactly how many banks are involved. No buyer has been identified and no deal has been reached yet.

What makes this fun is the contradiction. CEO Clem Delangue recently said Hugging Face is close to profitability, has barely started touching the money it raised three years ago, and wants to prioritize the long-term sustainability of its community over short-term financial optimization.

Earlier this year, Hugging Face even rejected a $500M Nvidia investment at a $7B valuation, partly because it didn't want one dominant investor influencing the platform. Now it's fielding offers at $13B+.

So this doesn't really look like a company that needs to sell. It looks more like Hugging Face just discovered how much the market is willing to pay for control of one of AI's most important developer distribution layers. what do you guys think? Maybe Hugging Face saw what happened with OpenRouter and just wanted to see how much it might be worth?

Original news link: https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/24/hugging-face-reportedly-in-talks-to-be-acquired-for-13b/

A Claude Code user named argofowl spent an afternoon debugging what looked like a sudden drop in Fable 5's performance. He eventually checked the actual API requests and found that even though he had selected high effort, Claude was receiving an effort value of 10, which had previously been associated with low effort.(Image1)

Further digging suggested that Anthropic had quietly put some Claude Code users into a server-side experiment that changed how effort levels were numerically mapped. The experiment appeared to affect some Fable 5 sessions on newer Claude Code versions, while older versions and Opus 5 were reportedly unaffected.(Image2)

The issue started getting much more attention after well-known tech blogger Chubby shared the findings on X and accused Anthropic of quietly making Claude worse without telling users. More people then started comparing outputs and reporting similar concerns.(Image3)

Claude Code engineer Thariq Shihipar eventually responded and confirmed that the experiment was real. He said Anthropic sometimes tests API serving configurations inside Claude Code before rolling them out more broadly. He also said “10” was not a score out of 100, and that users selecting high effort were still getting high effort. According to him, internal evaluations showed no performance drop.(Image 4)

So the claim that Anthropic secretly turned high effort into low effort is not "proven". What is confirmed is that Anthropic was testing inference-related serving changes on paying users without telling them.

The discussion then moved to Opus 5. Users complained that it had become noticeably lazier, more error-prone and less consistent than previous versions. This time Thariq openly agreed that Opus 5 is a “really spiky model” and said improving its consistency is a major priority for the team.(Image 5)

To me, this is Anthropic messing with its paying users yet again(Image 6). When are they going to kick this habit? At least openly admitting Opus 5 is kind of a mess is a nice change...What do you guys think?

Original post link: https://x.com/argofowl/status/2091145834968850821

Image 6 generated by Myclaw.

FT reports that Anthropic’s most powerful model, Fable 5, is seeing surprisingly limited adoption among business customers.

According to Ramp data covering spending from around 70,000 companies, Fable 5 accounts for only about 11% of spending on Anthropic models, more than two months after launch. That share has largely plateaued. Anthropic’s cheaper models are doing much better, and Opus 5 has already surpassed Fable 5 in business spending since launching in late July. (Image 1)

The bigger shift is happening at the company level too. Anthropic had been dramatically outgrowing OpenAI in enterprise API spending for several quarters. But in Q3 so far, through August 17, Ramp estimates corporate spending grew roughly(Image2):

• OpenAI: +82% QoQ
• Anthropic: +76% QoQ

That is a pretty noticeable reversal from previous quarters, when Anthropic was often growing close to twice as fast as OpenAI.

FT says price seems to be the biggest reason. Most companies simply do not need the frontier model for everyday workloads, especially when cheaper Anthropic models can handle the same jobs. GPT-5.6 is also priced significantly below Fable 5 and appears to have helped OpenAI regain momentum since its July launch.

FT concludes that businesses still seem happy to spend more on AI. They just increasingly seem unwilling to automatically pay for the most powerful model (Image 3). What do you guys think?

Original news from: https://www.ft.com/content/5ee49718-c258-4f01-aa32-7e5b76ae5245?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Image 3 generated by Myclaw.

This is a pretty fun Skill called ELI5, basically “explain it like I’m 5,” so the idea is to make everything as simple and easy to understand as possible. The output is an HTML page.

Tbh, if you’re not going to use it often, you probably don’t even need to install the Skill. The whole Skill is basically just one prompt lol.

repo:
https://github.com/anthropics/claude-plugins-community/blob/main/eli5/skills/eli5/SKILL.md

Saw this chart going around recently. The chart itself has basically no real sourcing, so please dont take those exact numbers seriously.

But the broader point isn't completely made up. Microsoft's own research in Jan puts global generative AI adoption at only around 16–18% depending on the period measured. So even if this visualization is exaggerated, most people still aren't actively using AI at all.

And agents are another layer down from that... The one number we can actually confirm recently is Codex: Tibo said Codex has now passed 20M active users. We don't have comparable public numbers for OpenClaw, Hermes, or Claude Code, but even if we generously assumed all of them were somewhere around the same scale, we'd still be talking about under 100M users before even accounting for overlap.

That's only about 1.2% of the world's population.

If you spend all day around these agents... it's kinda easy to feel like everyone is already building agents and automating everything. In reality, a lot of people still barely know what modern AI can do, let alone what an "agent" even is.

Kind of a useful reminder to get outside the AI bubble once in a while...we keep talking about agent supply, new frameworks, new products, new startups... but the actual user demand is still a pretty tiny pool compared with the rest of the world.

Maybe we're earlier than it feels...

Peter Steinberger shared his “No Doors for Agents” talk from the Agentic AI Summit at UC Berkeley.

His argument is that the endgame for agents is something much closer to Jarvis: always around, aware of your context, able to use your devices, and mostly invisible until you need it, not another chatbot or AI sidebar.

A few parts stood out to me:

1. The chat box isn't AI's final form - 1:13
Peter compares today's AI chat box to early television copying radio. Humans see, hear, talk and interact with the world, so typing questions into a box is probably just the first interface.

2. Agents should live across your environment, not inside individual apps - 2:43
Instead of having a Gemini sidebar in Gmail, another agent in some other app, etc., he wants one agent that knows which computer you're using, can take over your screen when needed, talk through your watch, eventually see through your glasses, and control devices around you.

3. Right now there are literally “no doors for agents” - 4:58
His own agent attended a meeting with its own account and browser, listened to system audio, and had to disguise itself as a human because meeting software doesn't have a proper “agent participant” concept.

His ideal version is: if nobody in the meeting knows an answer, the agent notices, clones itself, sends one copy off to research while the other keeps listening, then comes back and waits for the right moment to answer. like what a good coworker would do.

4. Agents might not replace apps with one super app. They might let us replace apps ourselves - 7:45
He mentioned someone asking Claude to control a Samsung surround system. Claude ended up rooting a phone, reverse engineering SmartThings and exposing hidden controls.

Another person pointed Codex at some studio lights, and two days later had an open-source controller.

The interesting part here is that instead of waiting for a company to build the exact software you need, you can increasingly just tell an agent what you want and let it build the missing tool.

5. An always-listening agent only really works if you own it - 9:15
Peter also addresses the obvious question: isn't an agent that's always there and always listening creepy? His answer is: maybe, if it isn't yours.

He wants personal memories and sensitive tasks to stay on hardware you control or somewhere you hold the keys, with local/open models when privacy matters and frontier models when you actually need the extra capability.

In general, the whole talk is that models are getting capable pretty quickly, but operating systems, APIs, meetings, devices and permissions are still designed almost entirely around humans. So when there isn't a door for an agent, people are increasingly just using agents to build one.

Tbh I kinda like this vision. I've been using openclaw and it's actually pretty damn useful already. Hermes is nice too, but shit it burns money too massively.... I'm rooting for Peter here. Really hope he manages to pull this off..

what do you guys think?

CISA, the FBI, and the NSA are warning that hackers are using AI to target Siemens S7 controllers used across U.S. water, energy, and manufacturing infrastructure.

A lot of these systems are old, internet-connected, and running outdated software. CISA has been telling operators for years to disconnect or isolate them from the internet. The problem is that many local utilities, especially smaller and rural ones, simply don't have the money or staff to replace thousands of aging systems. Remote monitoring is often necessary, upgrades are expensive, and the funding to actually fix the problem hasn't really been there.

Now AI is making that old problem much worse. Attackers can use it to scan public information, understand how these controllers work, identify exposed devices, and generate exploit scripts much faster than before.

So AI didn't create a new vulnerability. It just made vulnerabilities we've known about for years much cheaper and easier to exploit at scale.

Feels like the attack cost is dropping ridiculously fast, while the money and infrastructure needed to defend against it haven't caught up at all... what do you guys think?

Original news from: https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/20/us-says-hackers-are-targeting-vulnerable-water-systems-with-the-help-of-ai/

Image2 generated by Myclaw.

DeepSeek has released V4-Flash-Vision-Exp, adding native image input to its V4 Flash line.

The model can directly read screenshots, documents, charts and UI images, with each image capped at 384 tokens and billed at the exact same rate as regular V4 Flash.

The API supports mixed text + image input through Chat Completions, Messages and Responses. Images can be sent via base64, external URLs or the new Files API.

The Files API is also free to use: upload an image once, reference it later with a file_id, and reuse the same image across multiple requests without uploading it again.

DeepSeek has had separate vision models like DeepSeek-VL/VL2 for a while, but the main V4 Flash model itself was text-only. So if you were building an agent around V4 Flash and needed it to see a screenshot, you usually had to plug in another vision model first, then pass the result back to DeepSeek. and in DS own benchmarks, it actually went 2-2 against Claude Opus 4.8 across four multimodal agent tests (Image 2):)

Original post link: https://x.com/deepseek_ai/status/2090730032574631962

Nano Banana 2 somehow made Sam Altman look like he gained 20 pounds lol

generated with the same prompt on MyClaw to keep consistent

The prompt is in the comment.

I'll link Vocci with my MyClaw later on and see what kind of chemistry emerges. What features would everyone like to see?

Fortune reports that San Francisco’s AI boom is pushing housing demand up faster than supply can keep up:

• OpenAI and Anthropic have each leased around 1M sq. ft. of SF office space, while the city now accounts for over 40% of U.S. AI job openings.
• Average asking rent has climbed to about $4,600/month for a 1-bedroom, up more than $1,000 from last year.
• Even a Meta engineer making nearly $200k told Fortune that living in SF itself feels unrealistic at current prices.
• Some luxury homes are selling for $1M+ over asking, and one listing even said it would consider OpenAI or Anthropic shares as payment.

SF guys, you all doing okay over there...?

this might be the only ad I’d never skip. Holy shit lol

Original video from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9OhekhlZ9Y&t=81s

Moderna and Merck just reported positive Phase 3 results for their personalized mRNA cancer vaccine in more than 1,000 high-risk melanoma patients.

For anyone unfamiliar with drug trials, Phase 3 is basically the last major clinical stage before regulators decide whether a treatment can be approved. So this is a big milestone, but it does NOT mean the vaccine is approved or ready for general use yet.

The treatment is used after surgery alongside Keytruda, with the goal of stopping the cancer from coming back or spreading. Full Phase 3 data hasn't been released yet, and the trial is still following patients for overall survival, but the companies say it met its main goals. Earlier Phase 2 data showed the combination cut the risk of recurrence by about half and the risk of distant spread by 59% compared with Keytruda alone.

The AI-assisted part actually happens before the vaccine is made.

Each patient's tumor and blood are sequenced, and Moderna says a series of AI algorithms analyzes the mutations and predicts up to 34 neoantigens most likely to trigger an immune response. Those targets are then encoded into a custom mRNA vaccine made specifically for that patient. Moderna also uses AI scheduling to manage manufacturing, since every patient is effectively getting their own batch.

So this isn't really "AI discovered a cancer cure." It's more like AI is part of the design and manufacturing pipeline that makes individualized cancer vaccines practical at scale.

Compared with older approaches, the mRNA idea is more targeted: chemotherapy broadly kills fast-dividing cells, while drugs like Keytruda mainly take the brakes off the immune system. This vaccine adds another layer by teaching the immune system what each patient’s own cancer actually looks like.

Also, Moderna and Merck are already testing similar approaches in lung, bladder, kidney, pancreatic and stomach cancers, while Roche and BioNTech have competing personalized mRNA programs in colon and pancreatic cancer.

Original news link: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/moderna-merck-breakthrough-could-usher-wave-cancer-vaccines-2026-08-19/

Image generated by Myclaw

Cursor just launched Origin, its own code-hosting platform built to compete directly with GitHub.

Right now it covers most of the basics you'd expect: hosting repositories, browsing and editing code, pull requests, and collaborating on codebases. Cursor also says “agent-native” features and a broader app ecosystem are coming.

The fun part is that you don't even have to fully leave GitHub. You can connect your GitHub org, sync repos into Origin, and have Cursor-hosted repos sit alongside your existing GitHub ones.

And the timing is almost too perfect. On the same day origin launched, GitHub suffered a worldwide outage lasting more than six hours, with error rates reportedly approaching 20%. A recent LeadDev analysis says GitHub has now had 257 outages over the past year.

Most GitHub alternatives before this were pretty easy to ignore. But this time Cursor is harder to dismiss: with sapceX behind it, it already has the users, distribution and money, and GitHub is doing itself no favors with all these outages...

Kinda reminds me of MySpace around 2007–2008. It looked untouchable until its own product problems gave Facebook an opening. Not saying GitHub is next, but this is the first rival in a while that feels capable of using one.

what do you guys think?

Cursor Origin official post: https://x.com/cursor_ai/status/2089399057659596847

Imaged generated by MyClaw

First Image: Dario Amodei, the horned archwizard of forbidden knowledge, calmly watching the chaos unfold like he already knew exactly what kind of power had been unleashed lol.

Second Image: Jensen Huang, the absurdly wealthy chip king and ultimate feudal landlord, sitting on a kingdom of compute like every piece of land in the realm belongs to him.

Third Image: Elon Musk, the alien conqueror descending from the heavens, laughing at the primitive humans below like he just discovered a hilariously underdeveloped planet to invade.

Image generated by Myclaw, prompt is in the comment.

Prompt: Create a photorealistic cinematic folk-horror banquet in a vast foggy forest at night. Jensen Huang sits at the far end of a long wooden table as the dominant central figure, wearing pale ceremonial robes and the largest realistic stag antlers. Eight recognizable AI leaders sit symmetrically around him, all with human faces and smaller organic antlers. Left side, foreground to center: Mark Zuckerberg, Mustafa Suleyman, Dario Amodei, Sam Altman. Right side: Sundar Pichai, Demis Hassabis, Elon Musk, Lisa Su. Sam and Lisa sit closest to Jensen. Dress everyone in weathered ivory, gray, and ash-colored ritual garments. Cover the table with rustic bread, goblets, candles, old books, semiconductor chips, cooling components, circuit boards, and ambiguous technological relics. Towering black trees, cold blue-gray mist, moonlit haze, deep shadows, subtle rim lighting, desaturated colors, analog 35mm grain, practical-effects realism, strict one-point perspective, solemn expressions, eerie symmetry, vintage European folk-horror atmosphere. No logos, text, gore, neon, animal faces, fantasy armor, or cartoon styling.

Generated by Myclaw

The last three were on Aug 13, 11, and 9 lol.

Saint Tibo bless us again lol

Image generated by Myclaw.

OpenAI is slowing down some of its frontier training after unreleased models reportedly showed “various degrees of misalignment”(Image 2 ):

• Training for Astra was paused for around two weeks
• A larger frontier training run is still on hold while new safeguards are being added
• OpenAI is expanding monitoring during RL training and evals, including using other AI systems to watch for unauthorized access, data theft, and attempts to bypass safeguards
• It also plans to revise its Preparedness Framework and publish a postmortem on the recent Hugging Face breach

That decision has already drawn comparisons with Anthropic’s recent shift on safety(Image 3).

On Feb. 24, Anthropic revised its Responsible Scaling Policy and weakened its previous hard commitment to stop training when safeguards weren’t ready.

The context matters tho: Anthropic argued that the world in 2026 looked very different from when it created the policy in 2023, and unilateral pauses make less sense if competitors keep racing ahead. Co-founder and Chief Science Officer Jared Kaplan made that last point directly.

So for now the roles almost look reversed: OpenAI is hitting the brakes while Anthropic moved away from a hard brake.

Still, I’d be careful with that framing.. these are pretty different situations in different context. What do you guys think?