InvokeAI

There are multiple internal and external changes in this version of InvokeAI which greatly enhance the developer and user experiences respectively. Website: invoke.ai

🚨 NOW: OpenAI is shifting focus away from side projects to double down on coding and enterprise businesses, per WSJ.

🚨 BREAKING: The AI switching war just changed. Anthropic just removed the biggest reason people stayed loyal to ChatGPT. Now Claude lets you import your entire memory from ChatGPT or Google Gemini in under 60 seconds. No rebuilding. No re-explaining. Your first Claude chat feels like your 100th. Switching cost = 0. And when switching cost goes to zero… Loyalty becomes optional. If this helped you 👇 ❤️ Like 💬 Comment ( Send ) for dm 🔁 RT ➕ Follow @piyascode9 for more AI updates 🚀

ChatGPT is super powerful AI Tool. But most people don't use its full potential Here're 10 powerful ChatGPT prompts to finish hours of work in seconds:

I asked ChatGPT what the best AI is, and it said Grok

ChatGPTなどのAIを使ってクリエイティブな業務を行うと、人間の創造性が「不可逆的に破壊される」という脅威の事実が判明しました。 一時的にアウトプットの質は向上するものの、AIへの依存が脳の認知システムを削り落とし、アイデアを永久に均質化させてしまいます。 その衝撃的な全貌と構造的な欠陥を3つのポイントにまとめました。 1. 創造性の『消失』 61名を対象とした30日間の対照実験により、AIを使用している間は創造的アウトプットが向上するものの、使用を停止した瞬間にその効果が完全に消失することが証明されました。これは能力が向上したのではなく、単に外部の計算資源に依存していただけの状態です。 2. 思考の『均質化』 最も致命的なのは、AIユーザーが生成するアイデアが極めて同質化していくという事実です。さらに恐ろしいことに、AIの使用を停止した後もこの均質化は継続し、個人の創造的な出力範囲が永久に圧縮されるという、脳の神経回路に対する不可逆的なダメージが確認されています。 3. 認知能力の『最適化エラー』 抜き打ちの創造性テストにおいて、従来の手法を用いた層が68.5%のスコアを出したのに対し、AIユーザーは57.5%まで低下しました。AIが認知的な負荷を肩代わりすることで、人間の脳内における創造的な「生の素材」を定着させるプロセスが完全にスキップされ、認知システムそのものが弱体化しています。

ChatGPT is a powerful AI Tool. But most people don’t know the best ways to use AI. That's why I build this Ultimate AI Tool Kit: • 1000+ AI Tools • 500+ No Code Tools • 500+ AI Prompts To get it, • Like • Reply "free" • Follow me (so that I can DM) I'll DM you

🚨 SHOCKING: MIT Media Lab just hooked people up to brain scanners while they used ChatGPT. What they found rewrites everything we thought we understood about AI and learning. They call it cognitive debt. And unlike financial debt, there may be no way to pay it back. Here is the setup. 54 participants. Three groups. Four months. Real EEG headsets tracking brain activity in real time across every session. Group one wrote essays using only their own brain. Group two used Google. Group three used ChatGPT. Same prompts. Same tasks. Same time limits. One pattern showed up so consistently it became impossible to ignore. ChatGPT users had the weakest brain connectivity of any group. Not once. Not occasionally. Every single session. Regions tied to memory formation, semantic reasoning, and critical analysis all showed measurably lower activation in the LLM group compared to the other two. Then the researchers ran a recall test. Participants were asked to quote lines from essays they had written just minutes earlier. 83% of ChatGPT users could not recall a single sentence from their own writing. They wrote it. It passed through them. Nothing stayed. Brain-only users remembered what they wrote. Google users remembered what they wrote. ChatGPT users produced the work and retained none of it. Then came the finding that changes the conversation entirely. In the final session, all ChatGPT users were told to write without AI. Their brains did not recover. Their neural connectivity was still measurably weaker than people who had never used AI at all. Not weaker than their own baseline. Weaker than people who never touched the tool. The tool was removed. The cost remained. Meanwhile something quietly remarkable happened on the other side of the experiment. Brain-only users who tried ChatGPT for the first time in the final session showed higher activation, better prompting, and stronger recall than the group that had been using it all along. Their brains were strong enough to use AI as a lever. The ChatGPT group had been using it as a replacement. The researchers also ran NLP analysis on the essays themselves. Every essay produced by ChatGPT users on the same topic looked almost identical. Same structure. Same named entities. Same patterns. More facts. More dates. More surface detail. Less original thought. People using ChatGPT produced generic output while believing they had written something personal. The ownership felt real. The thinking never happened. MIT named this cognitive debt. You borrow the model's processing power today. You pay with your own cognitive capacity tomorrow. And the repayment terms are not in your favour. The researchers are careful to say this is not a study about whether ChatGPT produces good essays. On surface metrics the output was fine. It is a study about what happens to the brain that produced nothing. The question that stays after reading this paper is not whether AI is useful. It is what you are training your brain to do every time you hand it the thinking. Students who use ChatGPT to write their essays look productive. Their output scores are intact. Their ability to think without the tool is quietly eroding with every session. And by the time anyone notices, the debt is already compounding.

The gen-AI market is experiencing a clear shift in user behavior. based on website traffic data tracking the 12 months leading up to Feb-26. - ChatGPT started this period with a massive lead. However, its dominant market share is steadily shrinking. - Google's Gemini is taking away that market share at a very fast pace, from 6% to 24% But ChatGPT still dominates the consumer market. Overall, the market is overwhelmingly controlled by just 2 main platforms.

GPT-5.4 Thinking and Pro are rolling out gradually starting today across ChatGPT, the API, and Codex. openai.com/index/introduc…

Yann LeCun, the infamous AI researcher who notoriously said LLMs wouldn’t bring AGI, has now launched AMI Labs with a massive $1.03B seed round at a $3.5B valuation. Their goal is to build a new breed of AI systems centered on "world models"—systems that can actually reason, plan, and have persistent memory beyond just predicting the next token. With their new CEO Alex LeBrun leading the charge, they are operating across Paris, NY, Montreal, and Singapore to tackle this” long-term scientific endeavor.” Will Yann reach AGI first 👀?

🚨 The most starred AI resource on the internet just got a massive upgrade. 151K GitHub stars. #33 most starred repo in the world. Featured in Forbes. Referenced by Harvard. It's called prompts chat. A free, open source library of expert prompts that make ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini 10x more useful. Most people type "help me write an email" and get generic slop. The difference between a bad AI response and a mind-blowing one is always the prompt. Here's what you can do: → Turn ChatGPT into a senior software engineer → Make it a personal financial advisor → Use it as a career coach that rewrites your resume → Transform it into a language tutor → Make it a cybersecurity expert that audits your code → Use it as a screenwriter, poet, or novelist Copy. Paste. Instant expert. Here's what's new: It's no longer just a list. It's a full platform now. → Browse prompts by category or AI-powered search → Create and share your own prompts → Vote on the best ones via the PromptMasters leaderboard → Private prompts. Keep your secret weapons hidden → Version control for prompts like GitHub PRs → Works as an MCP server for Claude Code and Cursor → Self-host for your company with custom branding → Free interactive prompt engineering course. 25+ chapters Every prompt is CC0 licensed. Public domain. Use them for anything. Zero restrictions. 100% Free. 100% Open Source.

🧵 ChatGPT vs Grok vs Gemini vs Claude vs Perplexity — 5 leading AI tools explained. Best use cases, strengths & pro tips. No hype, just practical insights to choose the right tool. 📌 Save this post & read the full thread 👇

During exams, MIT and Stanford students don’t just “ask ChatGPT questions.” They use specific prompts that turn AI into a 24/7 professor. Here are 15 prompts you can use to study faster, understand deeper, and score higher (save this):

Banyak orang masih pake AI random, padahal tiap tool punya lane-nya masing-masing. Ini 5 AI yang paling banyak dipake, dan kapan lu harus pake yang mana: 1. Chatgpt (master of... lumayan) si paling serba bisa. ini pintu masuk mayoritas orang karena ekosistemnya udah mateng banget. - paling pas buat task general, nulis email ringan, nyari ide, atau generate gambar. - minusnya: buat nulis panjang atau mikir dalem, hasilnya masih kalah dari claude. 2. Claude temen mikir yang paling natural. gaya nulis dan logikanya kerasa paling oke. - jago banget buat nulis panjang, bedah dokumen kompleks, sampe ngoding. - minusnya: bukan pilihan pertama kalo lu butuh narik data real-time dari internet. 3. Gemini raja ekosistem google. kalo tiap hari lu buka docs, sheets, atau drive, integrasinya paling bagus di sini. - kuat di riset langsung dari google search dan gampang nerima input visual atau audio. - minusnya: gaya bahasa dan responnya kadang masih kerasa kaku dibanding kompetitor. 4. Perplexity bukan AI untuk nulis atau ngoding, ini bukan ai buat nulis, tapi buat nyari tau fakta dengan cepet dan akurat. - andalan buat riset real-time, cek fakta, dan ngasih sumber link yang jelas. - minusnya: kurang dalem buat ngolah informasi, dia murni buat nyajiin data. 5. Grok si paling unfiltered. keunggulan utamanya ada di akses langsung ke data timeline x. - wajib buat mantau sentimen market, nyari tren awal, atau nanya hal yang ai lain nolak jawab. - minusnya: kemampuan nulisnya masih di bawah rata-rata. datanya dari timeline juga kadang terlalu berisik. Cheat sheet simpelnya: ‣ writing & analisis, code = Claude ‣ general purpose= ChatGPT ‣ riset real-time = Perplexity ‣ Google ecosystem = Gemini ‣ sentimen market crypto & web3= Grok orang yang produktif itu bukan yang setia sama satu tool. tapi yang tau kapan harus ganti.

🚨BREAKING: OpenAI published a paper proving that ChatGPT will always make things up. Not sometimes. Not until the next update. Always. They proved it with math. Even with perfect training data and unlimited computing power, AI models will still confidently tell you things that are completely false. This isn't a bug they're working on. It's baked into how these systems work at a fundamental level. And their own numbers are brutal. OpenAI's o1 reasoning model hallucinates 16% of the time. Their newer o3 model? 33%. Their newest o4-mini? 48%. Nearly half of what their most recent model tells you could be fabricated. The "smarter" models are actually getting worse at telling the truth. Here's why it can't be fixed. Language models work by predicting the next word based on probability. When they hit something uncertain, they don't pause. They don't flag it. They guess. And they guess with complete confidence, because that's exactly what they were trained to do. The researchers looked at the 10 biggest AI benchmarks used to measure how good these models are. 9 out of 10 give the same score for saying "I don't know" as for giving a completely wrong answer: zero points. The entire testing system literally punishes honesty and rewards guessing. So the AI learned the optimal strategy: always guess. Never admit uncertainty. Sound confident even when you're making it up. OpenAI's proposed fix? Have ChatGPT say "I don't know" when it's unsure. Their own math shows this would mean roughly 30% of your questions get no answer. Imagine asking ChatGPT something three times out of ten and getting "I'm not confident enough to respond." Users would leave overnight. So the fix exists, but it would kill the product. This isn't just OpenAI's problem. DeepMind and Tsinghua University independently reached the same conclusion. Three of the world's top AI labs, working separately, all agree: this is permanent. Every time ChatGPT gives you an answer, ask yourself: is this real, or is it just a confident guess?

California is my home, and I love it here, and when I talked to Attorney General Bonta two weeks ago I made clear that we were not going to do what those other companies do and threaten to leave if sued. We really wanted to figure this out and are really happy about where it all landed — and very much appreciate the work of the Attorney General!

Introducing ChatGPT Images, powered by our flagship new image generation model. - Stronger instruction following - Precise editing - Detail preservation - 4x faster than before Rolling out today in ChatGPT for all users, and in the API as GPT Image 1.5.

Thank you to our collaborators for their partnership. The preprint is available on arXiv and is being submitted for publication. We welcome feedback from the community. arxiv.org/abs/2602.12176

In modern amplitude theory, simple formulas often signal deeper structure. Showing that a case long thought to be empty actually contains structure sharpens our understanding of the mathematics of the strong force and opens new directions, including extensions to gravity and related amplitude relations. Some of these generalizations are also amenable to solution via this new AI methodology and will be reported on elsewhere.