Sathish

230 posts

Sathish banner
Sathish

Sathish

@FanofAITech

Full time Claudist, Grokist, Geminine, ChatGPTist etc........ Humans :- Plan, plan execute.... Machine : AI, AI, Agents......... Me: in Hunger for knowledge

bengaluru Katılım Haziran 2026
66 Takip Edilen18 Takipçiler
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@jaynitx Even mark finally accepted without ruining elon
English
0
0
0
21
Jaynit
Jaynit@jaynitx·
Mark Zuckerberg reveals why Elon Musk was right to fire 80% of Twitter's employees: "Elon led a push early on to make Twitter a lot leaner. You can agree or disagree with exactly all the tactics, but a lot of the specific principles that he pushed on around basically trying to make the organization more technical, around decreasing the distance between engineers of the company and him, fewer layers of management, I think those were generally good changes" "I also think that it was probably good for the industry that he made those changes because my sense is that there were a lot of other people who thought those were good changes but who may have been a little shy about doing them" "Just in my conversations with other founders and how people have reacted to the things that we've done, what I've heard from a lot of folks is when someone like you, when I wrote the letter outlining the organizational changes I wanted to make back in March and when people see what Elon is doing, that gives people the ability to think through how to shape their organizations in a way that can be good for the industry and make all these companies more productive over time" "That was one where I think he was quite ahead of a bunch of the other companies on. Certainly his actions led me and I think a lot of other folks in the industry to think about, hey, are we kind of doing this as much as we should? Could we make our companies better by pushing on some of these same principles?"
English
115
213
2.2K
738.8K
Ankur Warikoo
Ankur Warikoo@warikoo·
Life completely changes when you move from trying to impress everybody, to trying to impress yourself.
English
29
14
326
18.5K
Vaibhav Sisinty
Vaibhav Sisinty@VaibhavSisinty·
Microsoft is reportedly testing Kimi K3 to power their flagship Copilot AI assistant. Saving up to 60% per token. That's $600M saved on every $1B spent on inference. Kimi K3 already runs on Azure. K2.7 Code is already inside GitHub Copilot. This isn't new territory for Microsoft. It's the next step. And on July 27, Moonshot is open-sourcing the full 2.8 trillion parameter weights. Once that happens, Microsoft can self-host it on Azure instead of paying API fees. The cost drops even further. The biggest American tech company. Choosing a Chinese open-source model over its own partner's models. Because the math doesn't lie. Open source isn't just competing anymore. It's winning the contracts.
Vaibhav Sisinty tweet media
English
22
37
231
25.9K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@quxiaoyin you beautifully crafted those timeline and consumer pain points. Hope it reaches Anthropic to make corrections
English
1
0
5
1K
Xiaoyin Qu
Xiaoyin Qu@quxiaoyin·
Anthropic had the biggest miscalculation in AI 2026: 1. They underestimated the progress others made, and thought they can win forever. 2. Thus, they assumed their customers will continue to tolerate their terrible policies (pricing, random usage limits, bad data retention, arbitrary access removal etc.) and cocky PR because they are AGI. They didn't invest in building customer trust because they thought they didn't need to. 3. They also assumed by simply painting open-weight as dangerous and unsafe, they can persuade enterprises to not touch them and persuade government to ban them. 4. They knew user data in Claude Code is how they win, yet their bad user policy/pricing gave aways their already-sticky users to Codex/Grok/etc, enabling others to capture equally valuable user data on their own. 5. Meanwhile, they didn't invest enough in owning their compute, instead putting itself in a vulnerable position at the mercy of @elonmusk, their competitor. When a strong open-weight provider catches up(@thinkymachines, Kimi, GLM etc.), people suddenly realized Claude has 1. no pricing advantage 2. no compute advantage 3. no branding advantage (already broke enterprise trust, pissed off prosumers, and consumers don't know Claude exists) Anthropic needs some serious strategy pivots. The status quo won't work at all for them. They still have the highest caliber talents, so I am still hopefully they will change for the better. But simply a better model than Fable isn't going to be enough to turn things around IMO.
English
136
206
1.7K
90.9K
Kr$na
Kr$na@krishdotdev·
If water is becoming the biggest bottleneck for AI data centers why don’t we just put them in the ocean?
Kr$na tweet media
English
22
2
59
6.8K
Omkar
Omkar@psomkarbuilds·
why is Japan so behind in AI they gave us robots bullet trains PlayStation and yet barely show up in the AI race what actually happened ?
English
200
10
449
71.7K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@quxiaoyin Still lot more light to through upon is Fable Fable isn't Stable anymore
English
0
0
0
37
Xiaoyin Qu
Xiaoyin Qu@quxiaoyin·
Anthropic's cyber security guardrails could lead to national security risks. Imagine if all Chinese enterprises have kimi and all American enterprises have Claude. When American enterprises face cyber attacks and ask Claude to help defend it, but Claude said such prompts are not safe and refuse to do anything. This needs to stop.
Brian Roemmele@BrianRoemmele

🚨 Hugging Face just disclosed something that marks a real shift and proved why the fear theater of Anthropic makes sure we are powerless in an emergency. What happened… An autonomous AI agent: zero human operator in the loop breached part of their production infrastructure. It began with a malicious dataset that chained two code-execution bugs in their data-processing pipeline. From there the agent escalated privileges, harvested cloud and cluster credentials, and moved laterally across internal clusters. All over a single weekend. 17,000+ logged actions. Official disclosure: huggingface.co/blog/security-… The part that should make every one stop and think: When HF’s own security team tried to analyze the real attack logs, exploit payloads, and C2 artifacts using Anthropic and OpenAI frontier models through normal commercial APIs, the safety guardrails blocked them. BLOCKED THEM. The models could not reliably tell the difference between “incident responder doing forensics” and “attacker probing.” They had to fall back to a self-hosted open-weight model (GLM 5.2) running on their own infrastructure. That choice also kept sensitive attacker data and referenced credentials inside their environment — no exfiltration to a third-party API. This is why open source (specifically open-weight + self-hosted) wins in the agentic era. The asymmetry is now structural: • Attackers can (and did) run unrestricted agent frameworks — swarms of short-lived sandboxes, self-migrating command-and-control, autonomous decision loops executing thousands of actions. No corporate safety layer slows them down. • Defenders using only hosted “aligned” frontier models hit invisible walls exactly when the stakes are highest: when you need to feed real exploit code and attacker telemetry into an LLM to understand what just happened. Corporate safety tuning that treats legitimate high-signal forensic work as potential misuse creates a defender disadvantage. It is not theoretical anymore. Self-hosted open-weight models remove that choke point. You control the weights. You control the context window. You decide what restrictions (if any) apply. Your sensitive logs and credentials never leave your perimeter during analysis. You can have the model ready before the incident instead of discovering mid-breach that your primary analysis tools are blind to the very thing you need to see. HF deserves credit for rapid containment, transparent disclosure, and for already having self-hosted capability in place. They also used LLM-driven detection and triage on their own side. But the deeper signal is clear: In this AI world where both offense and defense are becoming agentic, sovereignty over your intelligence stack is no longer optional. The organizations and individuals who can run, inspect, audit, and (when necessary) remove guardrails on their own models will have the decisive edge in understanding and responding to threats that move at machine speed. Open source wins here not just because it is cheaper or more “democratic” in the abstract though those things matter. It wins because it is the only practical path to having tools that remain usable when the attack is real, the data is sensitive, and the safety filters of distant API providers become an obstacle instead of a feature selling hands tied lobotomies as “safety”. The agentic future is not coming. It is already probing production infrastructure. The question is no longer whether you will face autonomous agents. It is whether your analysis and response systems will still work when they arrive. And Dario, you and your game playing, ivory tower company is not needed.

English
48
86
684
67K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@cline So which one to put front end and which one to put backend
English
0
0
0
38
Cline
Cline@cline·
We tested Kimi K3 and Fable on a real bug from the Cline repo, and found that while both models were able to fix it - Fable wins on speed & Kimi wins on cost. - Kimi used 1.7x more tokens than Fable (1.2M vs. 730K) - Fable finished 3.4x faster - 3.5 min and 18 tool calls vs. Kimi’s 12 min and 34 tool calls. - Kimi cost 2.3x less ($0.92 vs. $2.13) thanks to its 3.3x per-token discount Both runs used the same Cline harness, and the traces indicate that Kimi is RL trained to spend more tokens thinking and verifying before completing. This is the first time we've seen an open weight model compete head to head with SOTA. Congratulations to the @Kimi_Moonshot team on this milestone!
Cline tweet media
English
168
427
5.7K
416.9K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@0xDevShah The restriction on closed sources and openness on open source as you say
English
0
0
0
81
Indian Tech & Infra
Indian Tech & Infra@IndianTechGuide·
🚨 ISRO is facing its biggest manpower crunch in 25 years. 🙏 Nearly 3 in 10 posts are lying vacant, with 5,632 vacancies out of 20,269 sanctioned positions. The Department of Space (DoS) now has fewer employees than it did in 2001–02, when it employed 14,847 people. WHAT COULD BE THE REASON?
English
550
767
9.9K
817.2K
Omkar
Omkar@psomkarbuilds·
At this point if AI writes 90% of code, who even survives in tech?
English
383
13
436
112.4K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@zeroxkyle Every launch faces critiques that make them stronger
English
0
0
0
3
Kyle
Kyle@zeroxkyle·
Remember it went from - It can hack everything - Cybersecurity is at risk - It is too dangerous to release - People will make bioweapons - It will literally cause world war to "ClaUde faBlE 5 wiLL be IncLudeD iN All maX anD tEaM pReMiUm pLaNs"
Claude@claudeai

Beginning July 20, Claude Fable 5 will be included in all Max and Team Premium plans, at 50% of limits. Pro and Team Standard users will continue to have access to Fable via usage credits, and will receive a one-time $100 credit. Demand for Fable has been challenging to predict, which is why we rolled it out to subscription plans in stages, extending access several times as we secured additional capacity.

English
154
430
8.2K
458.2K
Ben Pouladian
Ben Pouladian@benitoz·
Wall Street: Cheap Chinese models kill NVIDIA. Kimi 48 hours later: Subscriptions paused. GPUs maxed. Adding capacity as fast as possible. That’s Jevons Paradox with a CUDA bill. Cheaper intelligence doesn’t reduce compute demand. It detonates it.
Ben Pouladian tweet media
English
205
252
2.6K
377.6K
Yash
Yash@yashhq_22·
founders, will you be able to keep building if AI disappears tomorrow?
English
125
1
87
9K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@garyvee Listened by thousands, but it sucks in reality
English
0
0
0
9
Gary Vaynerchuk
Gary Vaynerchuk@garyvee·
No amount of money is worth your joy, fulfillment, and happiness.
English
161
143
1.5K
91.4K
Irushi
Irushi@Im_IrushiK·
Which AI company hallucinates the least in your experience? OpenAI Anthropic Google xAI DeepSeek Z. ai
English
57
1
48
8.3K
Omkar
Omkar@psomkarbuilds·
developers buy $3,000 laptops to run $200/month in AI tools to build products that make $0
English
244
67
1.2K
66.4K
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@AstraiaAI Wait !!! Let me ask AI to answer that for you
English
0
0
0
127
Sathish
Sathish@FanofAITech·
@VaibhavSisinty Next there would be diagnostic engineering ; checking the health of each agents
GIF
English
0
0
0
206
Vaibhav Sisinty
Vaibhav Sisinty@VaibhavSisinty·
A few weeks ago, the AI engineering world was talking about Loop Engineering. That conversation lasted about a month. Now it's shifting to something bigger. Graph Engineering. Let me explain what this means with something I actually built, before people were talking about it. I have three agents running on every major task. Not one. Three. The first agent does the work. Takes the task, breaks it down, writes the code, generates the output. One agent, one job, one loop. That's loop engineering. And it works until it doesn't. The problem: a single agent can only see its own work. If it makes a mistake in reasoning, it doesn't know. If it passes its own tests by rewriting the tests instead of fixing the code, it doesn't know. The loop is blind to its own flaws. So I added a second agent. The invigilator. It doesn't do the work. It doesn't have context on how the first agent approached the task. It only sees the output and checks the reasoning, the effort, the quality. Like an exam hall. The student writes the paper. The invigilator doesn't know the answers, but they know if the student is cheating or writing nonsense. Blind review. Independent check. Then there's the third agent. The evaluator. It watches both the worker and the invigilator. Checks whether the worker actually did the job. Checks whether the invigilator actually caught the problems. Decides whether the output is ready or needs another round. The manager of managers. Three agents. Three responsibilities. Connected in a graph, not a loop. That's Graph Engineering. Not one agent going in circles. Multiple agents connected in a network where each one has a different job and they feed into each other. Loop Engineering was giving one employee a task and hoping they got it right. Graph Engineering is building the team that makes sure they did. The cost goes up. Three agents instead of one. But here's what I noticed: rework goes to almost zero. With a single loop, I'd review, find problems, send it back, wait again. Three rounds minimum. With a graph, the agents catch each other's mistakes before I even see the output. The most expensive AI setup isn't the one that costs the most tokens. It's the one where you keep going back and forth because nobody checked the work. And here's the part that makes this accessible to everyone. You don't need frontier models for all three agents. Use a strong model for the worker. Use a cheaper open-source model for the invigilator. Use another cheap model for the evaluator. The checking doesn't need to be expensive it just needs to be independent. Three open-source agents in a graph can outperform one expensive frontier model running alone. Better results. Lower cost. That's the real unlock. -> Loop engineering asks: how do I make this agent better? -> Graph engineering asks: who's checking this agent's work? That's the difference between a smarter individual and a smarter system.
English
24
14
137
11.3K